Messages in this thread | | | From | Denis Vlasenko <> | Subject | Re: AUDIT: copy_from_user is a deathtrap. | Date | Wed, 22 May 2002 14:23:46 -0200 |
| |
> On 22 May 02 at 12:27, Denis Vlasenko wrote: > > > As Linus and others pointed out, copy_{to_from}_user has its uses and > > > will stay, but something like: > > > > I don't say 'kill it', I say 'rename it so that its name tells users what > > return value to expect'. However, one have to weigh > > Why?
Why what? Why rename copy_to_user? Because in its current form people misunderstand its return value and misuse it. We can keep unmodified version of copy_to_user for some time for compatibility.
Or maybe your "why?" is related to something else, I fail to understand you in that case.
> From copyin/out descriptions sent yesterday if you want same source code > running on all (BSD,SVR4,OSF/1) platforms, you must do > > if (copyin()) return [-]EFAULT;
But if I am new to Linux and just want to write my first piece of kernel code, copyout() is even worse than copy_to_user(): it too lacks info of what it can return (0/1, 0/-EFAULT, # of copied bytes, # of bytes remaining?) *and* copy direction become unclear: copy out of *what*? out of kernel memery? out of user memory? -- vda - 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/
| |