[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091110170453.GA11771@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 18:04:53 +0100
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Bryan Donlan <bdonlan@...il.com>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
Timo Sirainen <tss@....fi>,
Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...hat.com>,
WANG Cong <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: + prctl-add-pr_set_proctitle_area-option.patch added to -mm
tree
@@ -1424,6 +1424,28 @@ static void k_getrusage(struct task_stru
} while (t != p);
break;
+ case PR_SET_PROCTITLE_AREA: {
+ struct mm_struct *mm = current->mm;
+ unsigned long addr = arg2;
+ unsigned long len = arg3;
+ unsigned long end = arg2 + arg3;
+
+ if (len > PAGE_SIZE)
+ return -EINVAL;
+
+ if (addr >= end)
+ return -EINVAL;
+
+ if (!access_ok(VERIFY_READ, addr, len))
+ return -EFAULT;
+
+ mutex_lock(&mm->arg_lock);
+ mm->arg_start = addr;
+ mm->arg_end = end;
+ mutex_unlock(&mm->arg_lock);
This looks like the merging error, I guess this code should go into
sys_prct(), not k_getrusage().
The patch adds mm_struct->arg_lock mutex. Can't we reuse mm->mmap_sem?
A bit ugly to have mm->arg_lock just to synchronize sys_prctl() and
proc_pid_cmdline(), imho.
Yes, we can't do access_process_vm() under ->mmap_sem, but we can add
the new helper, say, access_process_vm_locked(tsk, mm, ...) which does
the actual work. Then proc_pid_cmdline() can take mmap_sem for reading,
read arg_start/arg_end and call access_process_vm_locked().
No?
Oleg.
--
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