On Mon, Oct 31, 2005 at 11:19:21PM +0100, Jesper Juhl wrote:
> On 10/26/05, Russell King <[email protected]> wrote:
> > No. If we're emulating a cmpxchg() on a clean BSS page, this code
> > as it stands today will write to the zero page making it a page which
> > is mostly zero. Bad news when it's mapped into other processes BSS
> > pages.
> >
> > Changing this for pte_dirty() means that we'll refuse to do a cmpxchg()
> > on a clean BSS page. The data may compare correctly, but because it
> > isn't already dirty, you'll fail.
> >
> > If we still had it, I'd say you need to use verify_area() to tell the
> > kernel to pre-COW the pages. However, that got removed a while back.
> >
>
> Yes, I removed verify_area() since it was just a wrapper for access_ok().
> If verify_area() was/is needed, then access_ok() should be just fine
> as a replacement as far as I can see.
Except verify_area() would pre-fault the pages in whereas access_ok()
just verifies that the address is a user page. That's quite important
in this case because in order to fault the page in, we need to use
put_user() to get the permission checking correct.
However, we can't use put_user() because then the cmpxchg emulation
becomes completely non-atomic.
--
Russell King
Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
maintainer of: 2.6 Serial core
-
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]
