Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Mon, 24 Jan 2011 00:01:56 +0100 (CET) | From | Jesper Juhl <> | Subject | [PATCH][RFC] Check poll_select_set_timeout return value in sys_poll |
| |
poll_select_set_timeout() may return -EINVAL if it's given invalid arguments. In sys_poll() we don't check the return value. The way poll_select_set_timeout() is called here currently I don't think can ever actually fail, but it doesn't hurt to be defensive - code has a tendency to change over time. This patch checks the return value and returns -EINVAL just like we do elsewhere if it does fail.
What do you think? Is this just pointless overhead or actually worth it as an "insurance policy"?
Signed-off-by: Jesper Juhl <jj@chaosbits.net> --- select.c | 5 +++-- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/select.c b/fs/select.c index e56560d..333d5aa 100644 --- a/fs/select.c +++ b/fs/select.c @@ -922,8 +922,9 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE3(poll, struct pollfd __user *, ufds, unsigned int, nfds, if (timeout_msecs >= 0) { to = &end_time; - poll_select_set_timeout(to, timeout_msecs / MSEC_PER_SEC, - NSEC_PER_MSEC * (timeout_msecs % MSEC_PER_SEC)); + if (poll_select_set_timeout(to, timeout_msecs / MSEC_PER_SEC, + NSEC_PER_MSEC * (timeout_msecs % MSEC_PER_SEC))) + return -EINVAL; } ret = do_sys_poll(ufds, nfds, to);
-- Jesper Juhl <jj@chaosbits.net> http://www.chaosbits.net/ Don't top-post http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html Plain text mails only, please.
| |