lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Mar]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: syscall_get_error() && TS_ checks
On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 9:45 AM, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 9:33 AM, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> Firstly, why do we need the IS_ERR_VALUE() check? This is only used by
>> do_signal/handle_signal, we do not care if it returns non-zero as long
>> as the value can't be confused with -ERESTART.* codes.
>
> There are system calls that can return "negative" values that aren't errors.
>
> Notably mmap() can return a valid pointer with the high bit set.
>
> So syscall_get_error() should return 0 for not just positive return
> values, but for those kinds of negative non-error values.
>
>> And why do we need the TS_ checks?
>
> Those may be bogus.
>
>> So why we can't simply change putreg32() to always sign-extend regs->ax
>> regs->orig_ax and just do
>>
>> static inline long syscall_get_error(struct task_struct *task,
>> struct pt_regs *regs)
>> {
>> return regs-ax;
>> }
>
> That would be *complete* garbage. Lots of system calls return positive
> values that sure as hell aren't errors.

Does this cause an observable problem? The only things that care are:

a) 32-bit debugger pokes some value with the high bit and a 64-bit
debugger reads it back. I seriously doubt we care.

b) 32-bit debugger pokes some value with the high bit set and the user
code switches to 64-bit mode and reads RAX. This case is so
terminally broken anyway that we definitely don't care.

c) 32-bit debugger pokes some value with the high bit set and
syscall_get_error happens. Oleg's proposed change won't change what
we do, but it will dramatically simplify the code.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-03-29 19:00    [W:0.062 / U:0.684 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site