> We're on UP. sys_getsockopt() does get_user() (due to the patch) and
> makes sure that the passed *optlen is sane. Even if this get_user()
> sleeps, the value it returns in "len" is what's currently in memory at
> the time of the get_user() return (correct?) Then an underlying
> *getsockopt() function does another get_user() on optlen (same address),
> without doing any other user-space data accesses or anything else that
> could sleep first. Is it possible that this second get_user()
> invocation would sleep? I think not since it's the same address that
> we've just read a value from, we did not leave kernel space, and we're
> on UP (so no other processor could have changed the mapping). So the
> patch appears to be sufficient for this special case (which is not
> unlikely).
this reasoning goes out the window with kernel preemption of course ;)
-
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]
