linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] make checkpatch warn about access to current->comm

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 27 Jan 2009 10:57:43 -0500
From:	Kyle McMartin <kyle@...radead.org>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Kyle McMartin <kyle@...radead.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
	Christoph Bartelmus <lirc@...telmus.de>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andy Whitcroft <apw@...dowen.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] make checkpatch warn about access to current->comm

On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 07:45:41AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> 
> On Tue, 27 Jan 2009, Kyle McMartin wrote:
> > 
> > Suggest using the get_task_comm accessor versus direct access to
> > current->comm.
> 
> I think "current->comm" is fine, and not racy.
> 
> It only gets racy when you ask for the name of _another_ task.
> 
> And quite frankly, I don't think anybody but /proc does that anyway. I 
> think this whole "get_task_comm()" thing is overrated. Most people are 
> better off doing just "current->comm".
> 

Sure, fine by me. I'd forgotten that prctl doesn't have a `pid' argument
to change another tasks comm.

regards, Kyle
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/