On Sun, 2009-11-01 at 12:45 -0800, Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote:
> +int sys_clone_with_pids(struct pt_regs *regs)
> +{
...
> + rc = copy_from_user(&kcs, ucs, sizeof(kcs));
> + if (rc)
> + return -EFAULT;
> +
> + /*
> + * TODO: If size of clone_args is not what the kernel expects, it
> + * could be that kernel is newer and has an extended structure.
> + * When that happens, this check needs to be smarter (and we
> + * need an additional copy_from_user()). For now, assume exact
> + * match.
> + */
> + if (kcs.clone_args_size != sizeof(kcs))
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + /*
> + * To avoid future compatibility issues, ensure unused fields are 0.
> + */
> + if (kcs.reserved1 || kcs.clone_flags_high)
> + return -EINVAL;
Suka, is there a reason we don't have these bits in some
arch-independent code? I would have thought the stuff in the
process_32.c code would be just as thin a wrapper as possible to unwrap
the pt_regs and call into generic code.
-- Dave
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
