[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4FBC0733.8030106@zytor.com>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 14:37:55 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>
CC: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, Indan Zupancic <indan@....nu>,
Roland McGrath <mcgrathr@...gle.com>,
Eric Paris <netdev@...isplace.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, mingo@...hat.com,
oleg@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org, rdunlap@...otime.net,
tglx@...utronix.de, luto@....edu, eparis@...hat.com,
serge.hallyn@...onical.com, pmoore@...hat.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, corbet@....net, eric.dumazet@...il.com,
markus@...omium.org, coreyb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
keescook@...omium.org
Subject: Re: seccomp and ptrace. what is the correct order?
On 05/22/2012 02:14 PM, Will Drewry wrote:
>>
>> I suspect the construction of those inlines can be improved.
>
> Seems likely - or just my use of them :)
>
One thing that could make the code worse is if you are in a flow where
the state of the TS_COMPAT flag is known but gcc doesn't know that. I
don't have an easy answer for that.
-hpa
--
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