linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] autofs: fix the wrong usage of the deprecated task_pgrp

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]

Message-Id: <1232351101.3136.87.camel@zeus.themaw.net>
Date:	Mon, 19 Jan 2009 16:45:01 +0900
From:	Ian Kent <raven@...maw.net>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>,
	Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "SergeE.Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] autofs: fix the wrong usage of the
	deprecated	task_pgrp_nr()

On Sun, 2009-01-18 at 22:35 -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Ian Kent wrote:
> > On Sun, 2009-01-18 at 08:34 +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >> parse_options(&pgid) sets pgid = task_pgrp_nr() which uses the global
> >> namespace. This is wrong, we use this pgid to find "struct pid" in the
> >> current's namespace. Change parse_options() to use task_pgrp_vnr().
> >>
> >> Also do s/task_pgrp_nr/task_pgrp_vnr/ in the debugging printks.
> >> checkpatch.pl complains about "line over 80 characters", but it should
> >> blame the cuurent code, not the patch.
> > 
> > This changelog entry doesn't really have anything that I can use to work
> > out if this change might introduce regressions.
> > 
> > It would be helpful to me if you could include:
> > 1) A brief statement about what your trying to achieve and why.
> > 2) The reason why task_pgrp_nr() has changed to task_pgrp_vnr() since
> > you made the change (that is someone working on pid namespaces) to
> > task_pgrp_nr().
> > 3) Why you believe this change won't introduce a regression.
> > 
> 
> The other thing is also: isn't it high time to remove autofs 3?  It has
> been unmaintained for at least 10 years now.  I should know ;)

That's a good idea.
Couldn't we rename autofs4 to autofs and add a MODULE_ALIAS("autofs4")
or something?

Ian


--
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/