Messages in this thread | | | From | Linus Torvalds <> | Date | Wed, 30 May 2012 15:51:27 -0700 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] vfs: fix IMA lockdep circular locking dependency |
| |
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 2:36 PM, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> wrote: > > The only difference is that for file-backed ones !MMU wants > VM_MAYEXEC in that file's bdi flags (BDI_CAP_EXEC_MAP). And > that actually sounds reasonable in !MMU case.
Ok, I don't think it should be strictly necessary, but I guess I don't mind either.
> Anyway, I've dumped the variant I've got into vfs.git@security_file_mmap; > it should be at commit f12a0fd062b1d259a0b6bc6442019e6d4c45e9f5. > > Comments?
Two small ones:
- I really don't think you should use "goto out" in security_mmap_file(). That implies that you're exiting the function, but in fact you're jumping to the very *meat* of the function.
So I think you should rename "out" as "no_added_exec" or something.
And a small question: This code:
+ ret = security_mmap_file(file, prot, flags); + if (!ret) { + down_write(¤t->mm->mmap_sem); + retval = do_mmap_pgoff(file, addr, len, prot, flags, pgoff); + up_write(¤t->mm->mmap_sem); + }
now seems to exist in four places. And in fact, that pretty much seems to *be* what vm_mmap() is, at this point. Why isn't there just one single vm_mmap() implementation, and then the callers of that?
Linus -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |