On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 11:24 AM, Al Viro wrote:
>
> Yes, but... if we decrement that sucker at all, why do we need to play with
> i at all? We need exactly nr_compat_longs get_user(), so why not make _that_
> the condition in the single-level loop?
Yeah, I think that code could be clarified
On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 11:24 AM, Al Viro v...@zeniv.linux.org.uk wrote:
Yes, but... if we decrement that sucker at all, why do we need to play with
i at all? We need exactly nr_compat_longs get_user(), so why not make _that_
the condition in the single-level loop?
Yeah, I think that code
On Fri, Jun 05, 2015 at 09:49:46AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 5:36 PM, Al Viro wrote:
> >
> > So basically that thing will trigger only on the last pass through
> > the outer loop. The only way for it to trigger a wraparound would
> > be to have
On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 5:36 PM, Al Viro wrote:
>
> So basically that thing will trigger only on the last pass through
> the outer loop. The only way for it to trigger a wraparound would
> be to have sizeof(long)/sizeof(compat_long_t) greater than LONG_MAX,
> which is, not too likely.
No. You
On Fri, Jun 05, 2015 at 09:49:46AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 5:36 PM, Al Viro v...@zeniv.linux.org.uk wrote:
So basically that thing will trigger only on the last pass through
the outer loop. The only way for it to trigger a wraparound would
be to have
On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 5:36 PM, Al Viro v...@zeniv.linux.org.uk wrote:
So basically that thing will trigger only on the last pass through
the outer loop. The only way for it to trigger a wraparound would
be to have sizeof(long)/sizeof(compat_long_t) greater than LONG_MAX,
which is, not too
On Fri, Jun 05, 2015 at 12:07:43AM +0200, Helge Deller wrote:
> In the functions compat_get_bitmap() and compat_put_bitmap() the variable
> nr_compat_longs stores how many compat_ulong_t words should be copied in a
> loop.
>
> The copy loop itself is this:
> if (nr_compat_longs-- > 0) {
>
Hi Linus,
* Linus Torvalds :
> On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 6:45 AM, Helge Deller wrote:
> >
> > Do you want me to send it again cleaned up, or will you just take yours?
>
> I'd prefer to get a re-send, I've already nuked the patch from me tree.
Sure.
The new patch is attached below.
If you think
On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 6:45 AM, Helge Deller wrote:
>
> Do you want me to send it again cleaned up, or will you just take yours?
I'd prefer to get a re-send, I've already nuked the patch from me tree.
These days, 99% of the patches I write are throw-away stuff just for
this kind of "how about
Hi Linus,
On 02.06.2015 03:49, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 11:44 AM, Helge Deller wrote:
Since nr_compat_longs gets unconditionally decremented in each loop, it's type
needs to be signed instead of unsigned to avoid possibly accessing userspace
memory behind the bitmap which
Hi Linus,
* Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org:
On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 6:45 AM, Helge Deller del...@gmx.de wrote:
Do you want me to send it again cleaned up, or will you just take yours?
I'd prefer to get a re-send, I've already nuked the patch from me tree.
Sure.
The new patch
On Fri, Jun 05, 2015 at 12:07:43AM +0200, Helge Deller wrote:
In the functions compat_get_bitmap() and compat_put_bitmap() the variable
nr_compat_longs stores how many compat_ulong_t words should be copied in a
loop.
The copy loop itself is this:
if (nr_compat_longs-- 0) {
if
On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 6:45 AM, Helge Deller del...@gmx.de wrote:
Do you want me to send it again cleaned up, or will you just take yours?
I'd prefer to get a re-send, I've already nuked the patch from me tree.
These days, 99% of the patches I write are throw-away stuff just for
this kind of
Hi Linus,
On 02.06.2015 03:49, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 11:44 AM, Helge Deller del...@gmx.de wrote:
Since nr_compat_longs gets unconditionally decremented in each loop, it's type
needs to be signed instead of unsigned to avoid possibly accessing userspace
memory behind the
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 11:44 AM, Helge Deller wrote:
>
> Since nr_compat_longs gets unconditionally decremented in each loop, it's type
> needs to be signed instead of unsigned to avoid possibly accessing userspace
> memory behind the bitmap which shouldn't be accessed.
I'd actually prefer to
In functions compat_get_bitmap() and compat_put_bitmap() the variable
nr_compat_longs stores how many compat_ulong_t words should be copied in a loop.
The copy-loop itself is this:
if (nr_compat_longs-- > 0) {
if (__get_user(um, umask)) return -EFAULT;
} else {
um = 0;
}
Since
In functions compat_get_bitmap() and compat_put_bitmap() the variable
nr_compat_longs stores how many compat_ulong_t words should be copied in a loop.
The copy-loop itself is this:
if (nr_compat_longs-- 0) {
if (__get_user(um, umask)) return -EFAULT;
} else {
um = 0;
}
Since
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 11:44 AM, Helge Deller del...@gmx.de wrote:
Since nr_compat_longs gets unconditionally decremented in each loop, it's type
needs to be signed instead of unsigned to avoid possibly accessing userspace
memory behind the bitmap which shouldn't be accessed.
I'd actually
18 matches
Mail list logo
