Re: do_sendfile ppos check ...

[Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>]

On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 04:10:13AM +0100, Herbert Poetzl wrote:
> 
> currently investigating ... probably a removal of
> the 'unnecessary' check (*ppos) would be a better
> approach, something like:
> 
> --- linux-2.6/fs/read_write.c   2005-10-28 23:59:02.000000000 +0200
> +++ linux-2.6/fs/read_write.c   2005-11-03 17:28:50.000000000 +0100
> @@ -719,9 +719,6 @@
>        	current->syscr++;
>        	current->syscw++;
> 
> -       if (*ppos > max)
> -               retval = -EOVERFLOW;
> -

This still doesn't make sense.  If ppos came in as NULL, it should
have become non-NULL long before it reaches this part of the function.

Look at the top of the do_sendfile function, it sets ppos if it is NULL.

Cheers,
-- 
Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/