lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Sep]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] remember to check return value from __copy_to_user() in cdrom_read_cdda_old()
On Tue, Sep 07 2004, viro@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 07, 2004 at 12:30:31PM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > it boils down to access_ok() not being sufficient on its own, and in
> > which case yes we should just use copy_to_user() and kill the check
> > completely as per the patch sent out.
>
> access_ok() is just "we can trust MMU to do the right thing when dealing
> with access to process address space at that address". On platforms with
> secondary address spaces (e.g. sparc) it's always true. On something like
> i386 we *could* use segments for the same purposes. In fact, we used to
> do just that - access to userland memory went with %fs as segment (thus
> the names like extinct memcpy_fromfs() and surviving set_fs()). However,
> it's cheaper to do that check explicitly instead of relying on MMU. And
> that's what access_ok() does.

Alright, I'm wondering how the misconception of what access_ok() really
guarantees snuck into cdrom.c. At least the patch takes care of it.

--
Jens Axboe

-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:06    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans