[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20111108162216.1ffb3e9a.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2011 16:22:16 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Serge Hallyn <serge@...lyn.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org, oleg@...hat.com,
richard@....at, ebiederm@...ssion.com, dhowells@...hat.com,
eparis@...hat.com, Serge Hallyn <serge.hallyn@...onical.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] user namespace: make signal.c respect user
namespaces (v4)
On Fri, 4 Nov 2011 22:24:37 +0000
Serge Hallyn <serge@...lyn.com> wrote:
> +static inline void fixup_uid(struct siginfo *info, struct task_struct *t)
> +{
> +#ifdef CONFIG_USER_NS
> + if (current_user_ns() == task_cred_xxx(t, user_ns))
> +#endif
> + return;
> +
> + if (SI_FROMKERNEL(info))
> + return;
> +
> + info->si_uid = user_ns_map_uid(task_cred_xxx(t, user_ns),
> + current_cred(), info->si_uid);
> +}
err, this function is a no-op if CONFIG_USER_NS=n. If that was
intentional then why on earth do this in such a weird fashion? If
unintentional then it makes me wonder how well tested all this was with
CONFIG_USER_NS=n?
I vaguely remember that I've forgotten how all this stuff works. Some
additional review input would be nice (cough-oleg-cough).
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists