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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 13:52:23 +0100 From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> To: Pavel Tikhomirov <ptikhomirov@...tuozzo.com>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...nvz.org>, John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>, Stanislav Kinsburskiy <skinsbursky@...tuozzo.com>, Mateusz Guzik <mguzik@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...tuozzo.com>, Konstantin Khorenko <khorenko@...tuozzo.com> Subject: task_is_descendant() cleanup On 01/23, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > Btw task_is_descendant() looks wrong at first glance. No, I missed the 2nd ->group_leader dereference. Still this function looks overcomplicated and the usage of thread_group_leader/group_leader just add the unnecessary confusion. It can be simplified a little bit: static int task_is_descendant(struct task_struct *parent, struct task_struct *child) { int rc = 0; struct task_struct *walker; if (!parent || !child) return 0; rcu_read_lock(); for (walker = child; walker->pid; walker = rcu_dereference(walker->real_parent)) if (same_thread_group(parent, walker)) { rc = 1; break; } rcu_read_unlock(); return rc; } Kees, I can send a patch if you think this very minor cleanup makes any sense. Oleg.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists