2005-09-30 02:24:00

by Chris Wright

Subject: [PATCH 05/10] [PATCH]: Missing acct/mm calls in compat_do_execve()

-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
------------------

As I do periodically, I checked to see how far out of sync
compat_do_execve() has gotten from do_execve(). And as usual there
was some missing stuff in the former. Perhaps we need some tighter
consolidation of these two routines to make this less likely to happen
in the future.

Anyways, on the success path of compat_do_execve() we forget
to call acct_update_integrals() and update_mem_hiwater(), as
is done in do_execve().

Signed-off-by: "David S. Miller" <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Chris Wright <[email protected]>
---
fs/compat.c | 4 ++++
1 files changed, 4 insertions(+)

Index: linux-2.6.13.y/fs/compat.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.13.y.orig/fs/compat.c
+++ linux-2.6.13.y/fs/compat.c
@@ -44,6 +44,8 @@
#include <linux/nfsd/syscall.h>
#include <linux/personality.h>
#include <linux/rwsem.h>
+#include <linux/acct.h>
+#include <linux/mm.h>

#include <net/sock.h> /* siocdevprivate_ioctl */

@@ -1567,6 +1569,8 @@ int compat_do_execve(char * filename,

/* execve success */
security_bprm_free(bprm);
+ acct_update_integrals(current);
+ update_mem_hiwater(current);
kfree(bprm);
return retval;
}

--

2005-09-30 05:49:09

by Hugh Dickins

Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/10] [PATCH]: Missing acct/mm calls in compat_do_execve()

On Thu, 29 Sep 2005, Chris Wright wrote:

> -stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
> ------------------
>
> As I do periodically, I checked to see how far out of sync
> compat_do_execve() has gotten from do_execve(). And as usual there
> was some missing stuff in the former. Perhaps we need some tighter
> consolidation of these two routines to make this less likely to happen
> in the future.
>
> Anyways, on the success path of compat_do_execve() we forget
> to call acct_update_integrals() and update_mem_hiwater(), as
> is done in do_execve().

The patch is good, but for -stable? Spelling corrections next?

Hugh

2005-09-30 21:24:36

by Chris Wright

Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/10] [PATCH]: Missing acct/mm calls in compat_do_execve()

* Hugh Dickins ([email protected]) wrote:
> The patch is good, but for -stable? Spelling corrections next?

Heh, I think you've got a good point. This one doesn't have any real
nasty side-effects that I can see. David do you have objections to
dropping this one from -stable?

thanks,
-chris

2005-10-01 02:18:41

by David Miller

Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/10] [PATCH]: Missing acct/mm calls in compat_do_execve()

From: Chris Wright <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 14:24:06 -0700

> * Hugh Dickins ([email protected]) wrote:
> > The patch is good, but for -stable? Spelling corrections next?
>
> Heh, I think you've got a good point. This one doesn't have any real
> nasty side-effects that I can see. David do you have objections to
> dropping this one from -stable?

No objections, you can drop it.