[patch] i386: remove unnecessary code

[Ingo Molnar]

* Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> I am really puzzled by set_fs(USER_DS) in setup_frame/setup_rt_frame.
> 
> How is it possible that current->addr_limit != USER_DS ? If this _is_ 
> possible, how can can we trust the result of access_ok() above?

hm, this is _ancient_ code (possibly dating back to the pharaohs). If we 
are in KERNEL_DS then we call do_signal() then we are most likely a 
kernel thread and regs->esp points to the kernel stack ... the result of 
which would be a quite spectacular crash anyway.

Patch below.

	Ingo

----------------------------->
Subject: [patch] i386: remove unnecessary code
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx>

Oleg Nesterov pointed out that the set_fs() calls in setup_frame()
and setup_rt_frame() were superfluous.

Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx>
---
 arch/i386/kernel/signal.c |    2 --
 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)

Index: linux/arch/i386/kernel/signal.c
===================================================================
--- linux.orig/arch/i386/kernel/signal.c
+++ linux/arch/i386/kernel/signal.c
@@ -380,7 +380,6 @@ static int setup_frame(int sig, struct k
 	regs->edx = (unsigned long) 0;
 	regs->ecx = (unsigned long) 0;
 
-	set_fs(USER_DS);
 	regs->xds = __USER_DS;
 	regs->xes = __USER_DS;
 	regs->xss = __USER_DS;
@@ -474,7 +473,6 @@ static int setup_rt_frame(int sig, struc
 	regs->edx = (unsigned long) &frame->info;
 	regs->ecx = (unsigned long) &frame->uc;
 
-	set_fs(USER_DS);
 	regs->xds = __USER_DS;
 	regs->xes = __USER_DS;
 	regs->xss = __USER_DS;
-
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/