[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0609231527560.26585@blonde.wat.veritas.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2006 15:38:34 +0100 (BST)
From: Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>
To: Kylene Jo Hall <kjhall@...ibm.com>
cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, akpm@...l.org,
Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ibm.com>,
Dave Safford <safford@...ibm.com>,
Serge Hallyn <sergeh@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] slim: fix bug with mm_users usage
On Fri, 22 Sep 2006, Kylene Jo Hall wrote:
Nothing to do with this patch as such, but as it went past I noticed
> --- linux-2.6.18-rc6-orig/security/slim/slm_main.c 2006-09-18 16:41:51.000000000 -0500
> +++ linux-2.6.18-rc6/security/slim/slm_main.c 2006-09-22 13:58:35.000000000 -0500
> @@ -529,7 +519,7 @@ static int enforce_integrity_read(struct
> spin_lock(&cur_tsec->lock);
> if (!is_iac_less_than_or_exempt(level, cur_tsec->iac_r)) {
> rc = has_file_wperm(level);
> - if (atomic_read(¤t->mm->mm_users) != 1)
> + if (current->mm && atomic_read(¤t->mm->mm_users) != 1)
> rc = 1;
I've not studied your patches, and I don't know what that line's about,
but you appear to be attaching considerable significance to the value of
mm->mm_users. Yet swapoff (try_to_unuse) has to bump it up to hold the
mm temporarily, as does get_task_mm() used in various places (mainly /proc).
Hugh
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists