提交 30587535 编写于 作者: K Kees Cook 提交者: Daniel Vetter

drm/i915: clarify reasoning for the access_ok call

This clarifies the comment above the access_ok check so a missing
VERIFY_READ doesn't alarm anyone.

v2:
 - rewrote comment, thanks to Chris Wilson
Signed-off-by: NKees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
[danvet: add patch history log to commit message.]
Signed-off-by: NDaniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
上级 647416f9
......@@ -747,7 +747,11 @@ validate_exec_list(struct drm_i915_gem_exec_object2 *exec,
length = exec[i].relocation_count *
sizeof(struct drm_i915_gem_relocation_entry);
/* we may also need to update the presumed offsets */
/*
* We must check that the entire relocation array is safe
* to read, but since we may need to update the presumed
* offsets during execution, check for full write access.
*/
if (!access_ok(VERIFY_WRITE, ptr, length))
return -EFAULT;
......
Markdown is supported
0% .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
先完成此消息的编辑!
想要评论请 注册