On Sun, Oct 13, 2019 at 11:13 AM Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Umm... TBH, I wonder if we would be better off if restore_sigcontext()
> (i.e. sigreturn()/rt_sigreturn()) would flat-out copy_from_user() the
> entire[*] struct sigcontext into a local variable and then copied fields
> to pt_regs...
Probably ok., We've generally tried to avoid state that big on the
stack, but you're right that it's shallow.
> Same for do_sys_vm86(), perhaps.
>
> And these (32bit and 64bit restore_sigcontext() and do_sys_vm86())
> are the only get_user_ex() users anywhere...
Yeah, that sounds like a solid strategy for getting rid of them.
Particularly since we can't really make get_user_ex() generate
particularly good code (at least for now).
Now, put_user_ex() is a different thing - converting it to
unsafe_put_user() actually does make it generate very good code - much
better than copying data twice.
Linus
