Hi,
> > + if (my_cq->ownpid != cur_pid) {
> > + ehca_err(device, "Invalid caller pid=%x ownpid=%x "
> > + "cq_num=%x",
> > + cur_pid, my_cq->ownpid, my_cq->cq_number);
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > + }
>
> (for other reviewers: this is not new code, just moved around)
>
> Owner tracking by pid is really dangerous. File descriptors can be
> passed around by unix sockets, a single process can have files open
> more than once, etc..
>
> It seems ehca wants to prevent threads other than the creating one
> from performing most operations. Can you explain the reason for this?
you point to the right spot... This has a historic reason as we
have needed to support fork(), system("date") etc for kernel 2.6.9,
hence those vma flags manipulation and this pid checking as proactive
protection/restriction. For newer kernel, I guess >=2.6.12, this checking
were not necessary, but we would feel better after we had tested user
space stuff more thoroughly without this piece of code. Since this is
not new code, can we pls handle this later?
Regards
Nam
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
