Re: AUDIT: copy_from_user is a deathtrap.

[Benjamin Herrenschmidt]

>But read (and particularly write) are _not_ re-startable without the
>knowledge of how much was written, because they change f_pos and other
>things ("write()" in particular changes a _lot_ of "other things", namely
>the data in the file itself, of course).

Looking at generic_file_write(), it ignore the count returned by
copy_from_user and always commit a write for the whole requested
count, regardless of how much could actually be read from userland.
The result of copy_from_user is only used as an error condition.

generic_file_read() on the other hand seems to be ok.

>There are other system calls that aren't re-startable, but basically
>read/write are the "big ones", and thus Linux should try its best to make
>them work in an environment that requires restartability. Most programs
>can live without various random ioctl's and special system calls, but very
>very few programs/environments can live without read/write.
>
>("restartable" here doesn't mean that the _kernel_ would re-start them,
>but that a "gc-aware library" can make wrappers around them and correctly
>restart them internally, if you see my point - kind of like how stdio
>already handles the issue of EINTR returns for read/write, which is
>actually very similar in nature).