Re: [ 17/68] regset: Return -EFAULT, not -EIO, on host-side memoryfault

[Jonathan Nieder]

Greg KH wrote:

> 3.0-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
>
> ------------------
>
> From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> commit 5189fa19a4b2b4c3bec37c3a019d446148827717 upstream.
>
> There is only one error code to return for a bad user-space buffer
> pointer passed to a system call in the same address space as the
> system call is executed, and that is EFAULT.

I don't think this has the potential to cause regressions, and it
certainly makes things saner, so from that point of view it looks
good.  But I am still wondering how it matches the following
criterion:

 - It must fix a problem that causes a build error (but not for things
   marked CONFIG_BROKEN), an oops, a hang, data corruption, a real
   security issue, or some "oh, that's not good" issue.  In short, something
   critical.

Can someone enlighten me?

Part of the reason I am asking is to figure out whether the patch
ought to be applied to 2.6.32.y, too.

Thanks,
Jonathan
--
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/