Re: Is it legal to return positive value when do_execve() succeeds?

[Tetsuo Handa]

KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > Thus, I think retval could be
> > ELF_PAGEALIGN(elf_bss + load_bias) if elf_bss + load_bias is bogus.
> 
> What's mean bogus?
> do_brk() call get_unmapped_area() and it check an argument is correctly
> unmapped and userland address. If elf_bss + load_bias point to invalid
> address, set_brk doesn't return elf_bss+load_bias.
> 
> 
> > I'm OK with this if it is guaranteed that elf_bss + load_bias is always valid
> > and set_brk() never returns ELF_PAGEALIGN(elf_bss + load_bias).
> 
> I think elf_bss + load_bias could be invalid (i.e. >TASK_SIZE). 
> but set_brk can detect it.
> 

Indeed. Then, we can replace BAD_ADDR() with IS_ERR_VALUE() as you proposed.



Well... who returns positive value when do_execve() succeeds? Nobody?
Then, I wonder why search_binary_handler() is designed to return positive value...
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/