From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756179AbXIFJbU (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Sep 2007 05:31:20 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754876AbXIFJbK (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Sep 2007 05:31:10 -0400 Received: from mpc-26.sohonet.co.uk ([193.203.82.251]:48274 "EHLO moving-picture.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754831AbXIFJbJ (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Sep 2007 05:31:09 -0400 Message-ID: <46DFC8D7.9020708@moving-picture.com> Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2007 10:31:03 +0100 From: James Pearson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040524 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alexey Dobriyan CC: "H. Peter Anvin" , Anton Arapov , Guy Streeter , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: 4096 byte limit to /proc/PID/environ ? References: <4474B7DB.8000304@moving-picture.com> <200605242029.k4OKTn9C031700@terminus.zytor.com> <447EF58C.6000605@moving-picture.com> <52dd17640708150954q798d137cn1b07739785917c5b@mail.gmail.com> <46C33700.1060605@zytor.com> <46D6CBED.4040301@moving-picture.com> <46DE6196.3050605@zytor.com> <46DEE0C9.1000402@moving-picture.com> <20070905172252.GA2104@martell.zuzino.mipt.ru> In-Reply-To: <20070905172252.GA2104@martell.zuzino.mipt.ru> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Disclaimer: This email and any attachments are confidential, may be legally X-Disclaimer: privileged and intended solely for the use of addressee. If you X-Disclaimer: are not the intended recipient of this message, any disclosure, X-Disclaimer: copying, distribution or any action taken in reliance on it is X-Disclaimer: strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received X-Disclaimer: this message in error, please notify the sender and delete all X-Disclaimer: copies from your system. X-Disclaimer: X-Disclaimer: Email may be susceptible to data corruption, interception and X-Disclaimer: unauthorised amendment, and we do not accept liability for any X-Disclaimer: such corruption, interception or amendment or the consequences X-Disclaimer: thereof. Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Alexey Dobriyan wrote: > On Wed, Sep 05, 2007 at 06:00:57PM +0100, James Pearson wrote: > >>H. Peter Anvin wrote: >> >>>Anton Arapov wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Hey guys, the future of this patch is important for me. What do you >>>>think, has this patch any chances to be committed to upstream? >>>> >>>>James Pearson writes: >>>> >>>> >>>>>H. Peter Anvin wrote: >>>>>There isn't that much that is duplicated - and there are also bits of >>>>>the /proc/PID/mem code that are not needed in this case, so I'm not >>>>>really sure if it is worth doing. >>>>> >>>>>I did submit a patch a few months ago - see: >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>Looks reasonable to me, except for the one overlong line. >>> >> >>OK, here is the patch (without the long line) against 2.6.23-rc5 - what >>else needs to be done to get it committed? > > > Remove duplicate ptrace_may_attach() checks, unecessary (), {} and > spaces before pointer names -- char *buf. environ_read() in the patch uses ptrace_may_attach() in a similar way as does mem_read(). Given that environ_read() is based on mem_read(), does this mean that duplicate ptrace_may_attach() checks need to be removed from mem_read() as well? Which ptrace_may_attach() needs to be removed? Thanks James Pearson