[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180317180131.GO30522@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2018 18:01:31 +0000
From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To: Dominik Brodowski <linux@...inikbrodowski.net>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: what the hell is compat_sys_x86_waitpid() for?
You have
COMPAT_SYSCALL_DEFINE3(x86_waitpid, compat_pid_t, pid, unsigned int __user *,
stat_addr, int, options)
{
return compat_sys_wait4(pid, stat_addr, options, NULL);
}
with
COMPAT_SYSCALL_DEFINE4(wait4,
compat_pid_t, pid,
compat_uint_t __user *, stat_addr,
int, options,
struct compat_rusage __user *, ru)
{
struct rusage r;
long err = kernel_wait4(pid, stat_addr, options, ru ? &r : NULL);
if (err > 0) {
if (ru && put_compat_rusage(&r, ru))
return -EFAULT;
}
return err;
}
so that turns into
return kernel_wait4(pid, stat_addr, options, NULL);
Now, look at
SYSCALL_DEFINE3(waitpid, pid_t, pid, int __user *, stat_addr, int, options)
{
return sys_wait4(pid, stat_addr, options, NULL);
}
and
SYSCALL_DEFINE4(wait4, pid_t, upid, int __user *, stat_addr,
int, options, struct rusage __user *, ru)
{
struct rusage r;
long err = kernel_wait4(upid, stat_addr, options, ru ? &r : NULL);
if (err > 0) {
if (ru && copy_to_user(ru, &r, sizeof(struct rusage)))
return -EFAULT;
}
return err;
}
and tell me what is the difference between those. In other words, the problem
with sys32_waitpid() was not that it didn't use proper wrappers - it's that
it was (and always had been) 100% pointless.
For fsck sake, look at the arguments. waitpid(2) takes pid_t, pointer to int
and an int. How the hell could it possibly have required a compat wrapper?
Let's get rid of the junk rather than covering it with more layers of crap...
Powered by blists - more mailing lists