Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 21 Aug 2006 10:36:46 +1000 | From | Paul Mackerras <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] introduce kernel_execve function to replace __KERNEL_SYSCALLS__ |
| |
Arnd Bergmann writes:
> Iit turned out most of the architectures that already implement > their own execve() call instead of using the _syscall3 function > for it end up passing the return value of sys_execve down, > instead of setting errno.
I really don't like having an "errno" variable in the kernel. What if two processes are doing an execve concurrently?
Anyway, your patch returns the (positive) errno value here:
> + WARN_ON(segment_eq(fs, USER_DS)); > + ret = execve(filename, (char **)argv, (char **)envp); > + if (ret) > + ret = errno; > + > + return ret;
but here we are testing for a negative value to mean error:
> - if (execve("/sbin/shutdown", argv, envp) < 0) { > + if (kernel_execve("/sbin/shutdown", argv, envp) < 0) {
Paul. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |