Re: [PATCH 3/4] Intel PTI implementaiton of MIPI 1149.7.

[J Freyensee <james_p_freyensee@linux.intel.com>]

On Tue, 2011-04-19 at 18:25 -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Apr 2011, james_p_freyensee@linux.intel.com wrote:
> 
> > +static void pti_control_frame_built_and_sent(struct pti_masterchannel *mc)
> > +{
> > +	struct pti_masterchannel mccontrol = {.master = CONTROL_ID,
> > +					      .channel = 0};
> > +	const char *control_format = "%3d %3d %s";
> > +
> > +	char comm[sizeof(current->comm) + 1];
> > +	u8 control_frame[CONTROL_FRAME_LEN];
> > +
> > +	if (!in_interrupt())
> > +		get_task_comm(comm, current);
> > +	else
> > +		strcpy(comm, "Interrupt");
> > +
> > +	/* Ensure our buffer is zero terminated */
> > +	comm[sizeof(current->comm)] = 0;
> > +
> 
> You definitely need to use get_task_comm() here, but that means you can't 
> allocate char comm[] on the stack with anything but TASK_COMM_LEN, which 
> is small enough that it shouldn't be an issue.  Otherwise there's nothing 
> protecting sizeof(current->comm) from changing without holding 
> task_lock(current).

I'm going to look at utilizing get_task_comm() more in this function,
but I think I am okay even if I miss one, as I am just doing a read from
it.  What is written in set_task_comm() states that threads may read
from current->comm without holding the task_lock().  The name could be
incomplete, which would be non-ideal (but acceptable), but it's supposed
to be safe from non-terminating string reads.

And it seems like the fix for

> + comm[sizeof(current->comm)] = 0;

can just be comm[TASK_COMM_LEN].