From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1G1KMP-0000zS-QI
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 14 Jul 2006 05:53:25 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1G1KMP-0000yz-3V
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 14 Jul 2006 05:53:25 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G1KMO-0000yu-SA
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 14 Jul 2006 05:53:24 -0400
Received: from [84.96.92.56] (helo=smTp.neuf.fr)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1G1KOL-0003sX-W2
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 14 Jul 2006 05:55:26 -0400
Received: from [84.102.211.169] by sp604003mt.gpm.neuf.ld
	(Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-5.05 (built Feb 16 2006))
	with ESMTP id <0J2E00F220SZIGB0@sp604003mt.gpm.neuf.ld> for
	qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 14 Jul 2006 11:53:23 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2006 11:53:21 +0200
From: Fabrice Bellard <fabrice@bellard.org>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Fix for accept
In-reply-to: <44B74C5A.6000408@nomovok.com>
Message-id: <44B76991.6030106@bellard.org>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
References: <44B61EBE.1090907@nomovok.com> <44B6AFB5.1080403@bellard.org>
	<44B74C5A.6000408@nomovok.com>
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Pablo Virolainen wrote:

> So I should write something like following instead?
> 
>         if (!get_user(addrlen,&target_addrlen)) {
>           return -EFAULT
>         }

Yes.

> The code seems to assume target_sockaddr == sockaddr, so why allocate
> temporary buffer and then do copying?

If the assumption "target_sockaddr == sockaddr" is made, then it is a bug.

> One could implement SOCKOP_[accept|getsockname|getpeername] with same
> code.
 > [...]

You can use common code, but I think it is clearer to have the 
do_accept, do_getsockname and do_getpeername helpers.

Fabrice.