From patchwork Thu Feb 20 20:47:47 2020 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: "Eric W. Biederman" X-Patchwork-Id: 11395005 Return-Path: Received: from mail.kernel.org (pdx-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [172.30.200.123]) by pdx-korg-patchwork-2.web.codeaurora.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28312109A for ; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 20:50:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mother.openwall.net (mother.openwall.net [195.42.179.200]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6374D208CD for ; Thu, 20 Feb 2020 20:50:03 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 6374D208CD Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=xmission.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kernel-hardening-return-17860-patchwork-kernel-hardening=patchwork.kernel.org@lists.openwall.com Received: (qmail 29786 invoked by uid 550); 20 Feb 2020 20:50:02 -0000 Mailing-List: contact kernel-hardening-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-ID: Delivered-To: mailing list kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com Received: (qmail 29741 invoked from network); 20 Feb 2020 20:50:01 -0000 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Al Viro , LKML , Kernel Hardening , Linux API , Linux FS Devel , Linux Security Module , Akinobu Mita , Alexey Dobriyan , Andrew Morton , Andy Lutomirski , Daniel Micay , Djalal Harouni , "Dmitry V . Levin" , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Ingo Molnar , "J . Bruce Fields" , Jeff Layton , Jonathan Corbet , Kees Cook , Oleg Nesterov , Solar Designer References: <20200210150519.538333-8-gladkov.alexey@gmail.com> <87v9odlxbr.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> <20200212144921.sykucj4mekcziicz@comp-core-i7-2640m-0182e6> <87tv3vkg1a.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> <87v9obipk9.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> <20200212200335.GO23230@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20200212203833.GQ23230@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20200212204124.GR23230@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <87lfp7h422.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> <87pnejf6fz.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> <871rqpaswu.fsf_-_@x220.int.ebiederm.org> Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2020 14:47:47 -0600 In-Reply-To: <871rqpaswu.fsf_-_@x220.int.ebiederm.org> (Eric W. Biederman's message of "Thu, 20 Feb 2020 14:46:25 -0600") Message-ID: <87tv3l9ea4.fsf_-_@x220.int.ebiederm.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-XM-SPF: eid=1j4slX-0008I9-Sf;;;mid=<87tv3l9ea4.fsf_-_@x220.int.ebiederm.org>;;;hst=in02.mta.xmission.com;;;ip=68.227.160.95;;;frm=ebiederm@xmission.com;;;spf=neutral X-XM-AID: U2FsdGVkX18FKktgO7yeajhH6EwOZZcjcqkyfTCGXi4= X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 68.227.160.95 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ebiederm@xmission.com X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on sa06.xmission.com X-Spam-Level: *** X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.2 required=8.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_50, DCC_CHECK_NEGATIVE,LotsOfNums_01,T_TooManySym_01,XMNoVowels,XMSubLong autolearn=disabled version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Report: * -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP * 0.8 BAYES_50 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 40 to 60% * [score: 0.4664] * 0.7 XMSubLong Long Subject * 1.5 XMNoVowels Alpha-numberic number with no vowels * 1.2 LotsOfNums_01 BODY: Lots of long strings of numbers * -0.0 DCC_CHECK_NEGATIVE Not listed in DCC * [sa06 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1] * 0.0 T_TooManySym_01 4+ unique symbols in subject X-Spam-DCC: XMission; sa06 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1 X-Spam-Combo: ***;Linus Torvalds X-Spam-Relay-Country: X-Spam-Timing: total 494 ms - load_scoreonly_sql: 0.06 (0.0%), signal_user_changed: 2.9 (0.6%), b_tie_ro: 2.1 (0.4%), parse: 1.01 (0.2%), extract_message_metadata: 11 (2.3%), get_uri_detail_list: 1.65 (0.3%), tests_pri_-1000: 14 (2.9%), tests_pri_-950: 1.29 (0.3%), tests_pri_-900: 1.10 (0.2%), tests_pri_-90: 27 (5.4%), check_bayes: 25 (5.1%), b_tokenize: 10 (2.0%), b_tok_get_all: 7 (1.5%), b_comp_prob: 2.2 (0.5%), b_tok_touch_all: 3.6 (0.7%), b_finish: 0.59 (0.1%), tests_pri_0: 424 (85.8%), check_dkim_signature: 0.54 (0.1%), check_dkim_adsp: 2.6 (0.5%), poll_dns_idle: 0.89 (0.2%), tests_pri_10: 2.2 (0.4%), tests_pri_500: 6 (1.3%), rewrite_mail: 0.00 (0.0%) Subject: [PATCH 1/7] proc: Rename in proc_inode rename sysctl_inodes sibling_inodes X-Spam-Flag: No X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Thu, 05 May 2016 13:38:54 -0600) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on in02.mta.xmission.com) I about to need and use the same functionality for pid based inodes and there is no point in adding a second field when this field is already here and serving the same purporse. Just give the field a generic name so it is clear that it is no longer sysctl specific. Also for good measure initialize sibling_inodes when proc_inode is initialized. Signed-off-by: Eric W. Biederman --- fs/proc/inode.c | 1 + fs/proc/internal.h | 2 +- fs/proc/proc_sysctl.c | 8 ++++---- 3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/proc/inode.c b/fs/proc/inode.c index 6da18316d209..bdae442d5262 100644 --- a/fs/proc/inode.c +++ b/fs/proc/inode.c @@ -68,6 +68,7 @@ static struct inode *proc_alloc_inode(struct super_block *sb) ei->pde = NULL; ei->sysctl = NULL; ei->sysctl_entry = NULL; + INIT_HLIST_NODE(&ei->sibling_inodes); ei->ns_ops = NULL; return &ei->vfs_inode; } diff --git a/fs/proc/internal.h b/fs/proc/internal.h index 41587276798e..366cd3aa690b 100644 --- a/fs/proc/internal.h +++ b/fs/proc/internal.h @@ -91,7 +91,7 @@ struct proc_inode { struct proc_dir_entry *pde; struct ctl_table_header *sysctl; struct ctl_table *sysctl_entry; - struct hlist_node sysctl_inodes; + struct hlist_node sibling_inodes; const struct proc_ns_operations *ns_ops; struct inode vfs_inode; } __randomize_layout; diff --git a/fs/proc/proc_sysctl.c b/fs/proc/proc_sysctl.c index c75bb4632ed1..42fbb7f3c587 100644 --- a/fs/proc/proc_sysctl.c +++ b/fs/proc/proc_sysctl.c @@ -279,9 +279,9 @@ static void proc_sys_prune_dcache(struct ctl_table_header *head) node = hlist_first_rcu(&head->inodes); if (!node) break; - ei = hlist_entry(node, struct proc_inode, sysctl_inodes); + ei = hlist_entry(node, struct proc_inode, sibling_inodes); spin_lock(&sysctl_lock); - hlist_del_init_rcu(&ei->sysctl_inodes); + hlist_del_init_rcu(&ei->sibling_inodes); spin_unlock(&sysctl_lock); inode = &ei->vfs_inode; @@ -483,7 +483,7 @@ static struct inode *proc_sys_make_inode(struct super_block *sb, } ei->sysctl = head; ei->sysctl_entry = table; - hlist_add_head_rcu(&ei->sysctl_inodes, &head->inodes); + hlist_add_head_rcu(&ei->sibling_inodes, &head->inodes); head->count++; spin_unlock(&sysctl_lock); @@ -514,7 +514,7 @@ static struct inode *proc_sys_make_inode(struct super_block *sb, void proc_sys_evict_inode(struct inode *inode, struct ctl_table_header *head) { spin_lock(&sysctl_lock); - hlist_del_init_rcu(&PROC_I(inode)->sysctl_inodes); + hlist_del_init_rcu(&PROC_I(inode)->sibling_inodes); if (!--head->count) kfree_rcu(head, rcu); spin_unlock(&sysctl_lock);