[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1838884.qlCOuH57mO@blindfold>
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2017 00:23:13 +0200
From: Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>,
Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>
Cc: "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] bpf: Don't check for current being NULL
Alexei,
Am Dienstag, 17. Oktober 2017, 00:06:08 CEST schrieb Alexei Starovoitov:
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:18 AM, Richard Weinberger <richard@....at> wrote:
> > current is never NULL.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
> > ---
> >
> > kernel/bpf/helpers.c | 12 ------------
> > 1 file changed, 12 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/bpf/helpers.c b/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
> > index 3d24e238221e..e8845adcd15e 100644
> > --- a/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
> > +++ b/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
> > @@ -120,9 +120,6 @@ BPF_CALL_0(bpf_get_current_pid_tgid)
> >
> > {
> >
> > struct task_struct *task = current;
> >
> > - if (unlikely(!task))
> > - return -EINVAL;
> > -
>
> really? in all context? including irq and nmi?
I would be astonished current is NULL in such a context.
To be sure, let's CC linux-arch.
IIRC I talked also with Al about this and he also assumed that current
cannot be NULL.
Thanks,
//richard
Powered by blists - more mailing lists