From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11942 invoked by alias); 13 Mar 2017 20:08:15 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 11933 invoked by uid 89); 13 Mar 2017 20:08:14 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=Hx-languages-length:401 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 20:08:14 +0000 Received: from int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.27]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BD5D63DBCC; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 20:08:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn04.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.4]) by int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id v2DK8DlI010965; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 16:08:14 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] linux-nat: Exploit /proc//mem for writing To: Andreas Arnez , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <1488816060-20776-1-git-send-email-arnez@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1488816060-20776-4-git-send-email-arnez@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <02db005d-ce53-2ed7-7668-31b721621f54@redhat.com> From: Pedro Alves Message-ID: <3e0bc748-64e6-674a-dcca-885a9a71650f@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 20:08:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <02db005d-ce53-2ed7-7668-31b721621f54@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2017-03/txt/msg00203.txt.bz2 On 03/13/2017 08:05 PM, Pedro Alves wrote: > Are we sure we can't see partial reads/writes here? > I.e., seems like we lose the "read/pread64 (fd, readbuf, len) != len" > checks? Gah, nevermind. I had it the other way around. What you have handles partial reads/writes better than what was there. So patch is OK. Thanks, Pedro Alves