On 2016/1/19 16:35, Greg KH wrote: > On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 03:49:27PM +0800, chenfeng wrote: >> >> >> On 2016/1/19 15:33, Greg KH wrote: >>> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 11:45:36AM +0800, Chen Feng wrote: >>>> When a process fork a child process, we should not allow the >>>> child process use the binder which opened by parent process. >>>> >>>> But if the binder-object creater is a thread of one process who exit, >>>> the other thread can also use this binder-object normally. >>>> We can distinguish this by the member proc->tsk->mm. >>>> If the thread exit the tsk->mm will be NULL. >>>> >>>> proc->tsk->mm != current->mm && proc->tsk->mm >>>> >>>> So only allow the shared mm_struct to use the same binder-object and >>>> check the existence of mm_struct. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Chen Feng <puck.chen@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> Signed-off-by: Wei Dong <weidong2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> Signed-off-by: Junmin Zhao <zhaojunmin@xxxxxxxxxx> >>>> Reviewed-by: Zhuangluan Su <suzhuangluan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> --- >>>> drivers/android/binder.c | 2 ++ >>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) >>> >>> Why resend? What changed from the previous version? >>> >> My fault, it's my error commit. >> mistake the current->mm with current->tsk->mm. >> The robot-compile finds out this error. > > Then please make it a 'v2' patch, and say what you changed, otherwise > I'll assume it's identical to the first patch you sent in. > > And how did you test the first patch if it couldn't even compile? > It works well on our platform with hundreds of mobile phone. Since our working branch is not mainline,and the patch is send for mainline review. I made a mistake while making the patch. I will send a new V2 for this patch. Thanks! > greg k-h > > . > _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
