Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 13 Oct 2009 00:45:33 +0200 | From | Frederic Weisbecker <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/6 RFC] arch/blackfin/kernel/process.c: Remove the BKL from sys_execve |
| |
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 12:33:21AM +0200, John Kacur wrote: > From b9b41b5a546ed0202c099f0d973da4df9aea314a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: John Kacur <jkacur@redhat.com> > Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 22:44:40 +0200 > Subject: [PATCH] arch/blackfin/kernel/process.c: Remove the BKL from sys_execve > > This looks like a cut-and-paste job. > For example, compare this function to sys_execve in > arch/x86/kernel/process_64.c > > and it is almost line by line the same, except the one in x86 nolonger has the > big kernel lock. All of the functions called between the lock are generic > and not specific to blackfin - thus, I believe it is safe to remove the > bkl here. > > Signed-off-by: John Kacur <jkacur@redhat.com> > --- > arch/blackfin/kernel/process.c | 6 +----- > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/blackfin/kernel/process.c b/arch/blackfin/kernel/process.c > index 430ae39..7d9c975 100644 > --- a/arch/blackfin/kernel/process.c > +++ b/arch/blackfin/kernel/process.c > @@ -215,22 +215,18 @@ copy_thread(unsigned long clone_flags, > /* > * sys_execve() executes a new program. > */ > - > asmlinkage int sys_execve(char __user *name, char __user * __user *argv, char __user * __user *envp) > { > int error; > char *filename; > struct pt_regs *regs = (struct pt_regs *)((&name) + 6); > > - lock_kernel(); > filename = getname(name); > error = PTR_ERR(filename); > if (IS_ERR(filename)) > - goto out; > + return error; > error = do_execve(filename, argv, envp, regs); > putname(filename); > - out: > - unlock_kernel(); > return error; > } > > -- > 1.6.0.6 > >
Yeah, there seem to be nothing to protect there.
Reviewed-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
| |