From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753114AbeCQBKZ (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Mar 2018 21:10:25 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:56458 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753044AbeCQBKX (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Mar 2018 21:10:23 -0400 Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2018 01:10:21 +0000 From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" To: Waiman Long Cc: "Luis R. Rodriguez" , Kees Cook , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, Jonathan Corbet , Andrew Morton , Al Viro , Matthew Wilcox , "Eric W. Biederman" Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/9] sysctl: Add flags to support min/max range clamping Message-ID: <20180317011021.GB4449@wotan.suse.de> References: <1521224030-2185-1-git-send-email-longman@redhat.com> <1521224030-2185-2-git-send-email-longman@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1521224030-2185-2-git-send-email-longman@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.0 (2016-04-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 02:13:42PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: > When the CTL_FLAGS_CLAMP_RANGE flag is set in the ctl_table > entry, any update from the userspace will be clamped to the given > range without error if either the proc_dointvec_minmax() or the > proc_douintvec_minmax() handlers is used. I don't get it. Why define a generic range flag when we can be mores specific and you do that in your next patch. What's the point of this flag then? Luis