Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: clarify reasoning for the access_ok call

[Kees Cook]

On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 1:51 PM, Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 12:26:30PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>> This clarifies the comment above the access_ok check so a missing
>> VERIFY_READ doesn't alarm anyone.
>
> Do we really need to copy the interface documentation?
>
> /**
>  * access_ok: - Checks if a user space pointer is valid
>  * @type: Type of access: %VERIFY_READ or %VERIFY_WRITE.  Note that
>  *        %VERIFY_WRITE is a superset of %VERIFY_READ - if it is safe
>  *        to write to a block, it is always safe to read from it.
>  * @addr: User space pointer to start of block to check
>  * @size: Size of block to check
>  */
> -Chris

Probably not. It just seemed like the existing comment was
insufficient after the removal of the redundant VERIFY_READ check that
happened recently.

-Kees

-- 
Kees Cook
Chrome OS Security
--
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/