[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170601172945.pr3a3s7rjve6kmqv@pd.tnic>
Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2017 19:29:45 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
Cc: x86-ml <x86@...nel.org>, lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] x86/ldt: Rename ldr_struct.size to .n_entries
On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 03:20:01PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> num_bytes, perhaps?
Better idea: entries_size.
I can read it very easily this way:
static int read_ldt(void __user *ptr, unsigned long bytecount)
{
struct mm_struct *mm = current->mm;
unsigned long entries_size;
int retval;
mutex_lock(&mm->context.lock);
if (!mm->context.ldt) {
retval = 0;
goto out_unlock;
}
if (bytecount > LDT_ENTRY_SIZE * LDT_ENTRIES)
bytecount = LDT_ENTRY_SIZE * LDT_ENTRIES;
entries_size = mm->context.ldt->n_entries * LDT_ENTRY_SIZE;
if (entries_size > bytecount)
entries_size = bytecount;
if (copy_to_user(ptr, mm->context.ldt->entries, entries_size)) {
retval = -EFAULT;
goto out_unlock;
}
if (entries_size != bytecount) {
/* Zero-fill the rest and pretend we read bytecount bytes. */
if (clear_user(ptr + entries_size, bytecount - entries_size)) {
retval = -EFAULT;
goto out_unlock;
}
}
retval = bytecount;
out_unlock:
mutex_unlock(&mm->context.lock);
return retval;
}
> > old_ldt = mm->context.ldt;
> > - oldsize = old_ldt ? old_ldt->size : 0;
> > + oldsize = old_ldt ? old_ldt->n_entries : 0;
>
> how about old_n_entries?
Yes, and new_n_entries too:
old_ldt = mm->context.ldt;
old_n_entries = old_ldt ? old_ldt->n_entries : 0;
new_n_entries = max(ldt_info.entry_number + 1, old_n_entries);
Thanks.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists