[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100628143715.GJ25077@tyan-ft48-01.lab.bos.redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 16:37:15 +0200
From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@...hat.com>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc: Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...hat.com>,
Darren Hart <dvhltc@...ibm.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Andreas Schwab <schwab@...hat.com>,
Danny Feng <dfeng@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
Subject: Re: Q: sys_futex() && timespec_valid()
On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 03:58:25PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> Honestly, it looks a bit strange to me that you blame the correct code,
Whether that is correct or not is what is being disputed.
> and at the same time you ignore the test-case which hangs because the
> kernel returns -EFAULT saying that this is the caller's problem.
The userspace code reads the abstime->tv_nsec value, so if it wouldn't
be valid address, the code would already segfault. And that's fine, POSIX
certainly allows that, reporting EFAULT isn't required. Well, it doesn't
read abstime->tv_sec in the assembly version, so if you try hard, you can
avoid the segfault, yet get EFAULT from futex syscall by putting abstime
8 bytes before start of some page with previous page not mmapped.
Jakub
--
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