Greg KH wrote: > 3.0-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. > > ------------------ > > From: "H. Peter Anvin" <[email protected]> > > commit 5189fa19a4b2b4c3bec37c3a019d446148827717 upstream. > > There is only one error code to return for a bad user-space buffer > pointer passed to a system call in the same address space as the > system call is executed, and that is EFAULT.
I don't think this has the potential to cause regressions, and it certainly makes things saner, so from that point of view it looks good. But I am still wondering how it matches the following criterion: - It must fix a problem that causes a build error (but not for things marked CONFIG_BROKEN), an oops, a hang, data corruption, a real security issue, or some "oh, that's not good" issue. In short, something critical. Can someone enlighten me? Part of the reason I am asking is to figure out whether the patch ought to be applied to 2.6.32.y, too. Thanks, Jonathan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
