lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Sep]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] seccomp: fix the usage of get/put_seccomp_filter() in seccomp_get_filter()
On 09/21, Kees Cook wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 3:57 AM, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> wrote:
> > On 09/20, Kees Cook wrote:
> >>
> >> Given how reference counting is done for filters, I'd be happier with
> >> leaving the get_seccomp_filter() as-is,
> >
> > No, please note that filter != tsk->seccomp.filter, get_seccomp_filter()
> > won't work.
>
> Ah yes, sorry, you're right.
>
> >> (i.e. don't open-code
> >> the refcount_inc()).
> >
> > agreed, probably another __get_seccomp_filter(filter) makes sense, especially
> > if we do other changes like get_nth().
> >
> > But imo not in this fix.
>
> Regardless, whatever lands will need backport adjustment for
> refcount_*/atomic_* in -stable.

yes, but this adjustment is trivial, and we will need it whatever we do
in this fix,

> Can you resend the two patches; I can send the backport to -stable manually...

Not sure I understand... Do you mean this fix + untested "introduce get_nth_filter()" ?

Can't we push this simple fix first? Then we can discuss the cleanups. Besides,
the 2nd patch connects to Tycho's "[PATCH] ptrace, seccomp: add support for
retrieving seccomp flags", otherwise it could be more simple.

Oleg.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-09-22 17:23    [W:0.068 / U:1.128 seconds]
©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site