Re: [PATCH] exec: do not leave bprm->interp on stack

[Al Viro]

On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 11:08:20PM +0530, P J P wrote:
> +-- On Thu, 25 Oct 2012, Al Viro wrote --+
> | 	* every bleeding script will have bogus execution of modprobe done
> | at execve time (and you'd better pray that /sbin/modprobe isn't a shell
> | script wrapper around the actual binary, or you *will* get loop prevention
> | kick in)
> | 	* none of the existing binfmt-<...> aliases is going to be hit
> | now; IOW, all usecases got broken.  Granted, realistically it just means
> | broken modular aout support, but then it's the only reason to have that
> | request_module() there in the first place.
> 
>   Please have a look at the updated patch below.
> 
> It fixes the issue of excessive calls to request_module. find_module() routine 
> is used before request_module(), to see if the module is already loaded or 
> not. Module alias could dodge this though, I guess.

"Could"?  Can you show a single module that would have name matching
binfmt-[0-9a-f]*?  In other words, are they ever loaded _not_ via an
alias?
--
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/