[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAGXu5j+yutPBpEq3qiVwAMT6q0y36bwM2ksBvj-=6AqkWAgaGQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 07:44:15 -0700
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
"Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@...hat.com>,
Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>,
Julien Tinnes <jln@...omium.org>,
David Drysdale <drysdale@...gle.com>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, linux-mips@...ux-mips.org,
linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-security-module <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 4/9] sched: move no_new_privs into new atomic flags
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 6:43 AM, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> wrote:
> On 06/24, Kees Cook wrote:
>>
>> --- a/include/linux/sched.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/sched.h
>> @@ -1307,8 +1307,7 @@ struct task_struct {
>> * execve */
>> unsigned in_iowait:1;
>>
>> - /* task may not gain privileges */
>> - unsigned no_new_privs:1;
>> + unsigned long atomic_flags; /* Flags needing atomic access. */
>>
>> /* Revert to default priority/policy when forking */
>> unsigned sched_reset_on_fork:1;
>
> Agreed, personally I like it more than seccomp->flags.
>
> But probably it would be better to place the new member before/after
> other bitfields to save the space?
Sure, I'll move it down. (Though I thought the compiler was smarter about that.)
-Kees
--
Kees Cook
Chrome OS Security
--
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