| Message ID | 20180905203443.32289-1-igor.stoppa@huawei.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | seccomp: remove unnecessary unlikely() | expand |
On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 1:34 PM, Igor Stoppa <igor.stoppa@gmail.com> wrote: > WARN_ON() already contains an unlikely(), so it's not necessary to wrap it > into another. > > Signed-off-by: Igor Stoppa <igor.stoppa@huawei.com> > Acked-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> Should I take this, or is it part of your series going somewhere else? -Kees > Cc: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org > Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > --- > kernel/seccomp.c | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/kernel/seccomp.c b/kernel/seccomp.c > index fd023ac24e10..5a2a9af4663e 100644 > --- a/kernel/seccomp.c > +++ b/kernel/seccomp.c > @@ -195,7 +195,7 @@ static u32 seccomp_run_filters(const struct seccomp_data *sd, > READ_ONCE(current->seccomp.filter); > > /* Ensure unexpected behavior doesn't result in failing open. */ > - if (unlikely(WARN_ON(f == NULL))) > + if (WARN_ON(f == NULL)) > return SECCOMP_RET_KILL_PROCESS; > > if (!sd) { > @@ -297,7 +297,7 @@ static inline pid_t seccomp_can_sync_threads(void) > /* Return the first thread that cannot be synchronized. */ > failed = task_pid_vnr(thread); > /* If the pid cannot be resolved, then return -ESRCH */ > - if (unlikely(WARN_ON(failed == 0))) > + if (WARN_ON(failed == 0)) > failed = -ESRCH; > return failed; > } > -- > 2.17.1 >
On 06/09/18 01:23, Kees Cook wrote:
> Should I take this, or is it part of your series going somewhere else?
It turned out it doesn't really work to have a generic series against 20
trees :-/
I'm submitting them individually to each subsystem.
So this one is just for security.
--
thanks, igor
On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 3:49 PM, Igor Stoppa <igor.stoppa@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On 06/09/18 01:23, Kees Cook wrote: > >> Should I take this, or is it part of your series going somewhere else? > > > It turned out it doesn't really work to have a generic series against 20 > trees :-/ I know that pain very well! > I'm submitting them individually to each subsystem. > So this one is just for security. Sounds good. James, can you take this directly, or would you prefer a pull request from me? -Kees
On Wed, 5 Sep 2018, Kees Cook wrote: > On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 3:49 PM, Igor Stoppa <igor.stoppa@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On 06/09/18 01:23, Kees Cook wrote: > > > >> Should I take this, or is it part of your series going somewhere else? > > > > > > It turned out it doesn't really work to have a generic series against 20 > > trees :-/ > > I know that pain very well! > > > I'm submitting them individually to each subsystem. > > So this one is just for security. > > Sounds good. > > James, can you take this directly, or would you prefer a pull request from me? I'll take it with your ack.
On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 5:08 PM, James Morris <jmorris@namei.org> wrote: > On Wed, 5 Sep 2018, Kees Cook wrote: > >> On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 3:49 PM, Igor Stoppa <igor.stoppa@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > >> > On 06/09/18 01:23, Kees Cook wrote: >> > >> >> Should I take this, or is it part of your series going somewhere else? >> > >> > >> > It turned out it doesn't really work to have a generic series against 20 >> > trees :-/ >> >> I know that pain very well! >> >> > I'm submitting them individually to each subsystem. >> > So this one is just for security. >> >> Sounds good. >> >> James, can you take this directly, or would you prefer a pull request from me? > > I'll take it with your ack. Already included! :) (This was a v2, split from a separate series, so Igor already included my Ack from the other thread.) But, for completeness: Acked-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> -Kees
On Wed, 5 Sep 2018, Igor Stoppa wrote: > WARN_ON() already contains an unlikely(), so it's not necessary to wrap it > into another. > > Signed-off-by: Igor Stoppa <igor.stoppa@huawei.com> > Acked-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> > Cc: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org > Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Applied to git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jmorris/linux-security.git next-general and next-testing. Thanks!
diff --git a/kernel/seccomp.c b/kernel/seccomp.c index fd023ac24e10..5a2a9af4663e 100644 --- a/kernel/seccomp.c +++ b/kernel/seccomp.c @@ -195,7 +195,7 @@ static u32 seccomp_run_filters(const struct seccomp_data *sd, READ_ONCE(current->seccomp.filter); /* Ensure unexpected behavior doesn't result in failing open. */ - if (unlikely(WARN_ON(f == NULL))) + if (WARN_ON(f == NULL)) return SECCOMP_RET_KILL_PROCESS; if (!sd) { @@ -297,7 +297,7 @@ static inline pid_t seccomp_can_sync_threads(void) /* Return the first thread that cannot be synchronized. */ failed = task_pid_vnr(thread); /* If the pid cannot be resolved, then return -ESRCH */ - if (unlikely(WARN_ON(failed == 0))) + if (WARN_ON(failed == 0)) failed = -ESRCH; return failed; }