From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
mmap() done from older !pt_gnu_stack binaries on noexec mounted filesystems
could fail due to the extra PROT_EXEC bit.
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
---
25-akpm/mm/mmap.c | 16 +++++++++-------
1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff -puN mm/mmap.c~nx-fix-read_implies_exec-related-noexec-fs-breakage mm/mmap.c
--- 25/mm/mmap.c~nx-fix-read_implies_exec-related-noexec-fs-breakage 2004-10-03 16:03:11.160490360 -0700
+++ 25-akpm/mm/mmap.c 2004-10-03 16:03:11.164489752 -0700
@@ -786,13 +786,6 @@ unsigned long do_mmap_pgoff(struct file
int accountable = 1;
unsigned long charged = 0;
- /*
- * Does the application expect PROT_READ to imply PROT_EXEC:
- */
- if (unlikely((prot & PROT_READ) &&
- (current->personality & READ_IMPLIES_EXEC)))
- prot |= PROT_EXEC;
-
if (file) {
if (is_file_hugepages(file))
accountable = 0;
@@ -804,6 +797,15 @@ unsigned long do_mmap_pgoff(struct file
(file->f_vfsmnt->mnt_flags & MNT_NOEXEC))
return -EPERM;
}
+ /*
+ * Does the application expect PROT_READ to imply PROT_EXEC?
+ *
+ * (the exception is when the underlying filesystem is noexec
+ * mounted, in which case we dont add PROT_EXEC.)
+ */
+ if ((prot & PROT_READ) && (current->personality & READ_IMPLIES_EXEC))
+ if (!(file && (file->f_vfsmnt->mnt_flags & MNT_NOEXEC)))
+ prot |= PROT_EXEC;
if (!len)
return addr;
_