Re: Suggestion on "int len" sanity

[XIAO Gang <xiao@unice.fr>]

Jörn Engel wrote:

>On Thu, 2 June 2005 09:28:55 +0200, XIAO Gang wrote:
>  
>
>>Examples:
>>
>>1. In the types of sys_[gs]ethostname, sys_[gs]etdomainname, "int len" 
>>could be replaced
>>by "unsigned int" or "size_t" and sanity check simplified.
>>    
>>
>
>If you really want that fun, try changing it to "unsigned long long"
>on your private machine and do some testing.
>
>Hint: arch/i386/kernel/syscall_table.S
>
I know; I might try to do something later. The question here is to find 
the best balancing point between what
are better replaced and what are not. I would hesitate a lot before 
doing things as below which are more likely to introduce new bugs than 
to avoid old ones.

>>3. The similar situation occurs in fs/namei.c, vfs_readlink(). Here it does 
>>not matter if len
>>is declared to be unsigned, but for size_t, we have to take care about the 
>>size of size_t.
>>    
>>
>
>You could possibly change the code to:
>
>int vfs_readlink(struct dentry *dentry, char __user *buffer, int buflen, const char *link)
>{
>	union {
>		unsigned len;
>		int ret;
>	} u;
>
>	u.ret = PTR_ERR(link);
>	if (IS_ERR(link))
>		goto out;
>
>	u.len = strlen(link);
>	if (u.len > (unsigned) buflen)
>		u.len = buflen;
>	if (copy_to_user(buffer, link, u.len))
>		u.ret = -EFAULT;
>out:
>	return u.ret;
>}
>
>But what would we gain, except for a few additional lines?
>
>Jörn
>
>  
>


-- 

XIAO Gang (~{P$8U~})                          xiao@unice.fr
          home page: pcmath126.unice.fr/xiao.html