Mark Johnston 33c2c58f0a shm: Respect PROT_MAX when creating private mappings ... We were previously unconditionally adding PROT_WRITE to the maxprot of private mapping (because a private mapping can be written even if the fd is read-only), but this might violate the user's PROT_MAX request. While here, rename cap_maxprot to max_maxprot. This is the intersection of the maximum protections imposed by capsicum rights on the fd (not really relevant for private mappings) and the user-required maximum protections (which were not being obeyed). In particular, cap_maxprot is a misnomer after the introduction of PROT_MAX. Add some regression test cases. mmap__maxprot_shm fails without this patch. Note: Capsicum's CAP_MMAP_W is a bit ambiguous. Should it be required in order to create writeable private mappings? Currently it is, even though such mappings don't permit writes to the object referenced by the fd. Reported by: brooks Reviewed by: brooks MFC after: 1 month Fixes: c7841c6b8e ("Relax restrictions on private mappings of POSIX shm objects.") Differential Revision: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D46741		2024-10-04 15:56:34 +00:00
..
Makefile
Makefile.depend
memfd_test.c
posixshm_test.c