3.10-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------ From: Vineet Gupta <[email protected]> commit 0752adfda15f0eca9859a76da3db1800e129ad43 upstream. Anton reported | LTP tests syscalls/process_vm_readv01 and process_vm_writev01 fail | similarly in one testcase test_iov_invalid -> lvec->iov_base. | Testcase expects errno EFAULT and return code -1, | but it gets return code 1 and ERRNO is 0 what means success. Essentially test case was passing a pointer of -1 which access_ok() was not catching. It was doing [@addr + @sz <= TASK_SIZE] which would pass for @addr == -1 Fixed that by rewriting as [@addr <= TASK_SIZE - @sz] Reported-by: Anton Kolesov <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Vineet Gupta <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]> --- arch/arc/include/asm/uaccess.h | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) --- a/arch/arc/include/asm/uaccess.h +++ b/arch/arc/include/asm/uaccess.h @@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ * Because it essentially checks if buffer end is within limit and @len is * non-ngeative, which implies that buffer start will be within limit too. * - * The reason for rewriting being, for majorit yof cases, @len is generally + * The reason for rewriting being, for majority of cases, @len is generally * compile time constant, causing first sub-expression to be compile time * subsumed. * @@ -53,7 +53,7 @@ * */ #define __user_ok(addr, sz) (((sz) <= TASK_SIZE) && \ - (((addr)+(sz)) <= get_fs())) + ((addr) <= (get_fs() - (sz)))) #define __access_ok(addr, sz) (unlikely(__kernel_ok) || \ likely(__user_ok((addr), (sz)))) -- 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/
