Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262426AbUKDUf2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Nov 2004 15:35:28 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262411AbUKDUfD (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Nov 2004 15:35:03 -0500 Received: from fw.osdl.org ([65.172.181.6]:20451 "EHLO mail.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262410AbUKDU1n (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Nov 2004 15:27:43 -0500 Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 12:27:38 -0800 From: Chris Wright To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: do_execve calls destroy_context when init_new_context has failed Message-ID: <20041104122738.I14339@build.pdx.osdl.net> References: <20041104074411.GA30985@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <20041104074411.GA30985@localhost>; from frumplestillskins@yahoo.co.uk on Thu, Nov 04, 2004 at 02:44:11AM -0500 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 674 Lines: 17 * David Meybohm (frumplestillskins@yahoo.co.uk) wrote: > Who's right here? fork or exec? I think both are right. The difference is on execve the mm is completely fresh (specifically it's zeroed out, including the context). On fork it's manually copied from the parent, so destroying it could actually destory some parent context. thanks, -chris -- Linux Security Modules http://lsm.immunix.org http://lsm.bkbits.net - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/