linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] extend get/setrlimit to support setting rlimits external to a process (v7)

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: <20091102151032.GF23776@elte.hu>
Date:	Mon, 2 Nov 2009 16:10:32 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	marcin.slusarz@...il.com, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com,
	hpa@...or.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] extend get/setrlimit to support setting rlimits
	external to a process (v7)


two small comments:

this is a really dangerous pattern:

> +	if (!lock_task_sighand(tsk, &flags))
> +		goto out_put_all;
> +

as it's followed by:

> +	else {
> +		struct rlimit val;
> +
> +		task_lock(tsk->group_leader);
> +		val = current->signal->rlim[resource];
> +		task_unlock(tsk->group_leader);
> +		retval = copy_to_user(rlim, &val, sizeof(*rlim)) ? -EFAULT : 0;
> +	}

please turn that into the regular:

	if () {
		...
	} else {
		...
	}

pattern that is a lot harder to mess up later on.

> +	return retval;
> +}
> +
> +
>  #ifdef __ARCH_WANT_SYS_OLD_GETRLIMIT

one too many newlines?

	Ingo
--
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/