Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 31 Mar 2012 17:27:10 -0400 (EDT) | Subject | Re: sendmmsg: put_user vs __put_user | From | David Miller <> |
| |
From: Ulrich Drepper <drepper@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2012 08:30:25 -0400
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 20:51, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote: >> Compat processes are not able to generate virtual addresses anywhere >> near the range where the kernel resides, so the address range >> verification done by put_user() is completely superfluous and >> therefore not necessary. The normal exception handling done by the >> access is completely sufficient. > > I was more thinking about the effects of might_fault() then additional tests.
This is very clearly in a context where locks are not held and sleeping would be fine, so I don't see any value in that either. -- 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/
| |