From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14AF7C18E5A for ; Mon, 9 Mar 2020 17:36:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5D8F20828 for ; Mon, 9 Mar 2020 17:36:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727366AbgCIRgs (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Mar 2020 13:36:48 -0400 Received: from out02.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.232]:60476 "EHLO out02.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727257AbgCIRgr (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Mar 2020 13:36:47 -0400 Received: from in01.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.51]) by out02.mta.xmission.com with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jBMKZ-00016U-Gy; Mon, 09 Mar 2020 11:36:43 -0600 Received: from ip68-227-160-95.om.om.cox.net ([68.227.160.95] helo=x220.xmission.com) by in01.mta.xmission.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from ) id 1jBMKY-0007sX-Iu; Mon, 09 Mar 2020 11:36:43 -0600 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: Bernd Edlinger Cc: Christian Brauner , Kees Cook , Jann Horn , Jonathan Corbet , Alexander Viro , Andrew Morton , Alexey Dobriyan , Thomas Gleixner , Oleg Nesterov , Frederic Weisbecker , Andrei Vagin , Ingo Molnar , "Peter Zijlstra \(Intel\)" , Yuyang Du , David Hildenbrand , Sebastian Andrzej Siewior , Anshuman Khandual , David Howells , James Morris , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Shakeel Butt , Jason Gunthorpe , Christian Kellner , Andrea Arcangeli , Aleksa Sarai , "Dmitry V. Levin" , "linux-doc\@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel\@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-fsdevel\@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-mm\@kvack.org" , "stable\@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-api\@vger.kernel.org" References: <87v9nmjulm.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> <202003021531.C77EF10@keescook> <20200303085802.eqn6jbhwxtmz4j2x@wittgenstein> <87v9nlii0b.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> <87a74xi4kz.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> <87r1y8dqqz.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> <87tv32cxmf.fsf_-_@x220.int.ebiederm.org> <87v9ne5y4y.fsf_-_@x220.int.ebiederm.org> <87pndm5y3l.fsf_-_@x220.int.ebiederm.org> Date: Mon, 09 Mar 2020 12:34:24 -0500 In-Reply-To: (Bernd Edlinger's message of "Mon, 9 Mar 2020 13:56:54 +0000") Message-ID: <87mu8p4elb.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-XM-SPF: eid=1jBMKY-0007sX-Iu;;;mid=<87mu8p4elb.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org>;;;hst=in01.mta.xmission.com;;;ip=68.227.160.95;;;frm=ebiederm@xmission.com;;;spf=neutral X-XM-AID: U2FsdGVkX1/gNgifOiuTUXAnVHdP8jsGgkYYuPh4Nbk= X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 68.227.160.95 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ebiederm@xmission.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] exec: Only compute current once in flush_old_exec X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Thu, 05 May 2016 13:38:54 -0600) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on in01.mta.xmission.com) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Bernd Edlinger writes: > On 3/8/20 10:35 PM, Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> >> Make it clear that current only needs to be computed once in >> flush_old_exec. This may have some efficiency improvements and it >> makes the code easier to change. >> >> Signed-off-by: "Eric W. Biederman" >> --- >> fs/exec.c | 9 +++++---- >> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/fs/exec.c b/fs/exec.c >> index db17be51b112..c3f34791f2f0 100644 >> --- a/fs/exec.c >> +++ b/fs/exec.c >> @@ -1260,13 +1260,14 @@ void __set_task_comm(struct task_struct *tsk, const char *buf, bool exec) >> */ >> int flush_old_exec(struct linux_binprm * bprm) >> { >> + struct task_struct *me = current; >> int retval; >> >> /* >> * Make sure we have a private signal table and that >> * we are unassociated from the previous thread group. >> */ >> - retval = de_thread(current); >> + retval = de_thread(me); >> if (retval) >> goto out; >> >> @@ -1294,10 +1295,10 @@ int flush_old_exec(struct linux_binprm * bprm) >> bprm->mm = NULL; >> >> set_fs(USER_DS); >> - current->flags &= ~(PF_RANDOMIZE | PF_FORKNOEXEC | PF_KTHREAD | >> + me->flags &= ~(PF_RANDOMIZE | PF_FORKNOEXEC | PF_KTHREAD | >> PF_NOFREEZE | PF_NO_SETAFFINITY); > > I wonder if this line should be aligned with the previous? In this case I don't think so. The style used for second line is indent with tabs as much as possible to the right. I haven't changed that. Further mixing a change in indentation style with just a variable rename will make the patch confusing to read because two things have to be verified at the same time. So while I see why you ask I think this bit needs to stay as is. Eric