On Fri, 24 Dec 2010 18:16:26 +0900
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> The upper bytes of ctx64 might contain garbages because it was
> set by get_user() which copied only lower 4 bytes as its second
> argument points to. Since sys_io_setup() requires its argumet
> is properly initialized to 0 we should set it explicitly.
>
> On x86, this was not a problem since its implementation of
> get_user() does a C assignment so that it can fill upper bytes
> with 0's. But other archs that use __get_user_asm() or something
> might have a problem.
>
> Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/compat.c | 2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/compat.c b/fs/compat.c
> index 4376e07febbb..b074e9f79148 100644
> --- a/fs/compat.c
> +++ b/fs/compat.c
> @@ -526,7 +526,7 @@ asmlinkage long
> compat_sys_io_setup(unsigned nr_reqs, u32 __user *ctx32p)
> {
> long ret;
> - aio_context_t ctx64;
> + aio_context_t ctx64 = 0;
>
> mm_segment_t oldfs = get_fs();
> if (unlikely(get_user(ctx64, ctx32p)))
Well. What _should_ a get_user(some_u64, some_u32*) do to `some_u64'?
I don't recall it coming up before but I'd say that the sane, expected
and certainly *safe* behaviour would be for the implementation to zero
out the upper 32 bits of `some_u64'.
If that's the rule then those architectures need fixing. Did you have
any architectures in mind?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
