linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH v2] unify sys_pipe implementation

To: "Ulrich Drepper" <drepper@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] unify sys_pipe implementation
From: DM <dm.n9107@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 5 May 2008 10:30:09 +0200
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=1vNwkNd0nYp80jvMF7wkf5IzXiIWL5OfoM0OUPtffOY=; b=LW2i4fqiGK0gDCkGKjTOsbBU+Dwt8Fk/Puzc3G3d+TuAFzVNSNkDvOUW3ljxGS0bD4lvTN9BQOd3llDmkw6JpgldgBPoDd2diPHrUmFrl58o7YPqzl7FBr1QHh/AYeY8mPUc4HxjGwlnKYpJz/lx3JG0kCa59Da38YXkuGcxxYU=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=BlZwLZDhJ5raNDFiSkTgDB/awo0JiLN32gBHWuJQe3aT3Y9IDI28CKeeb5iFJZ0+Qo0d82CJr1Jy55dYyWaBhYUlWppdyTfT/11R1T28fXMf/Pzb8hp6TTPbd+cljYrson/oULp/4V4fmo8n81+vA/Aay08Hg1bx44tYIJLGuH0=
In-reply-to: <200805031801.m43I109q032242@devserv.devel.redhat.com>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <200805031801.m43I109q032242@devserv.devel.redhat.com>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
On Sat, May 3, 2008 at 8:01 PM, Ulrich Drepper <drepper@redhat.com> wrote:
[...]
>   /*
>  + * sys_pipe() is the normal C calling standard for creating
>  + * a pipe. It's not the way Unix traditionally does this, though.
>  + */
>  +asmlinkage long sys_pipe(int __user *fildes)
>  +{
>  +       int fd[2];
>  +       int error;
>  +
>  +       error = do_pipe(fd);
>  +       if (!error) {
>  +               if (copy_to_user(fildes, fd, sizeof(fd)))
>  +                       error = -EFAULT;
>  +       }
>  +       return error;
>  +}
>  +
[...]

I realize this code is old, but wouldn't file descriptors leak if
copy_to_user fails?

BR,
dm.n9107

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>