From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/8803 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Rich Felker Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH] prevent allocs than PTRDIFF_MAX via mremap Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2015 16:46:09 -0500 Message-ID: <20151102214609.GM8645@brightrain.aerifal.cx> References: <1446282885-5290-1-git-send-email-danielmicay@gmail.com> <563487CA.5080706@gmail.com> <20151031203039.GJ8645@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1446500791 23109 80.91.229.3 (2 Nov 2015 21:46:31 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2015 21:46:31 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-8816-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Mon Nov 02 22:46:29 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ZtMvs-0002qq-D3 for gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org; Mon, 02 Nov 2015 22:46:28 +0100 Original-Received: (qmail 25625 invoked by uid 550); 2 Nov 2015 21:46:24 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 25607 invoked from network); 2 Nov 2015 21:46:23 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20151031203039.GJ8645@brightrain.aerifal.cx> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Original-Sender: Rich Felker Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:8803 Archived-At: On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 04:30:39PM -0400, Rich Felker wrote: > On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 05:20:10AM -0400, Daniel Micay wrote: > > It seems like a call to __vm_wait() might also be needed here when > > MREMAP_FIXED is passed as a flag. I don't know anything about robust > > futexes though, so someone else will need to figure that out. > > Thanks. I'll review both issues and see if there's anything else wrong > in this file. I think there's at least one other conceptual problem: > use of va_arg when the flags that do indicate that a variadic argument > was passed. I've committed your patch and the additional changes from this thread. Thanks! Rich