On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 5:26 AM, Joerg Roedel <[email protected]> wrote:
> +
> +static bool access_error(struct vm_area_struct *vma, struct page_req_dsc
> *req)
> +{
> + return !((req->rd_req && (vma->vm_flags & VM_READ)) ||
> + (req->wr_req && (vma->vm_flags & VM_WRITE)) ||
> + (req->exe_req && (vma->vm_flags & VM_EXEC)));
> +}
This seems odd.
Shouldn't it be
return ((req->rd_req && !(vma->vm_flags & VM_READ)) ||
(req->wr_req && !(vma->vm_flags & VM_WRITE)) ||
(req->exe_req && !(vma->vm_flags & VM_EXEC)));
instead?
Of course, if you just used the VM_xyz flags internally itself, this
would all be easier, and you'd end up with something like
/* Do we have requested bits that aren't in the allowed set? */
return (requested & ~vma->vm_flags) != 0;
instead..
Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
