lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [May]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 14/38] Remove struct mm_struct::exe_file et al
    On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 04:24:15PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
    > On Tue, 26 May 2009 04:36:18 -0700
    > Matt Helsley <matthltc@us.ibm.com> wrote:
    >
    > > I don't see any mention in the changelog of the point brought up by Ingo:
    > >
    > > http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/4/10/105
    >
    > Nor of Eric's comments.
    >
    > Alexey, pleeeze don't do this. We (read: I) heavily depend upon patch
    > submitters to keep track of outstanding issues and review comments,
    > etc.
    >
    > If the patch submitter simply blows these things off then it devolves
    > to me having to keep track of each patch's issue list as well as the
    > patch itself. My workload goes up by a factor of N and the error rate
    > goes up by N^2 :(

    grmbh..

    "Security" and "holding ->mmap_sem" were answered and dismissed.

    You can't do readlink(2) on /proc/*/exe if you can't ptrace task.
    So no new possible holes are created.

    ->mmap_sem was held since /proc/*/exe was added and nobody cared.
    And, again, you can't readlink _any_ /proc/*/exe.

    Patch simply restores code to year-back state.

    I'll send removal and readddition of "struct path" as separate things
    next time.


    And BTW, there is something unnatural when executable path is attached
    to mm_struct(!) not task_struct, so yet another argument to ->exe_file
    removal.


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2009-05-31 23:57    [W:2.461 / U:0.172 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site