[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <202008240929.8DDED2B90@keescook>
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 09:34:27 -0700
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: Denis Efremov <efremov@...ux.com>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] seccomp: Use current_pt_regs()
On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 03:59:21PM +0300, Denis Efremov wrote:
> Modify seccomp_do_user_notification(), __seccomp_filter(),
> __secure_computing() to use current_pt_regs().
This looks okay. It seems some architectures have a separate
define for current_pt_regs(), though it's overlapped directly with
task_pt_regs(). I'm curious what the benefit of the change is?
-Kees
>
> Signed-off-by: Denis Efremov <efremov@...ux.com>
> ---
> kernel/seccomp.c | 14 +++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/seccomp.c b/kernel/seccomp.c
> index 3ee59ce0a323..dc4eaa1d6002 100644
> --- a/kernel/seccomp.c
> +++ b/kernel/seccomp.c
> @@ -910,7 +910,7 @@ static int seccomp_do_user_notification(int this_syscall,
> if (flags & SECCOMP_USER_NOTIF_FLAG_CONTINUE)
> return 0;
>
> - syscall_set_return_value(current, task_pt_regs(current),
> + syscall_set_return_value(current, current_pt_regs(),
> err, ret);
> return -1;
> }
> @@ -943,13 +943,13 @@ static int __seccomp_filter(int this_syscall, const struct seccomp_data *sd,
> /* Set low-order bits as an errno, capped at MAX_ERRNO. */
> if (data > MAX_ERRNO)
> data = MAX_ERRNO;
> - syscall_set_return_value(current, task_pt_regs(current),
> + syscall_set_return_value(current, current_pt_regs(),
> -data, 0);
> goto skip;
>
> case SECCOMP_RET_TRAP:
> /* Show the handler the original registers. */
> - syscall_rollback(current, task_pt_regs(current));
> + syscall_rollback(current, current_pt_regs());
> /* Let the filter pass back 16 bits of data. */
> seccomp_send_sigsys(this_syscall, data);
> goto skip;
> @@ -962,7 +962,7 @@ static int __seccomp_filter(int this_syscall, const struct seccomp_data *sd,
> /* ENOSYS these calls if there is no tracer attached. */
> if (!ptrace_event_enabled(current, PTRACE_EVENT_SECCOMP)) {
> syscall_set_return_value(current,
> - task_pt_regs(current),
> + current_pt_regs(),
> -ENOSYS, 0);
> goto skip;
> }
> @@ -982,7 +982,7 @@ static int __seccomp_filter(int this_syscall, const struct seccomp_data *sd,
> if (fatal_signal_pending(current))
> goto skip;
> /* Check if the tracer forced the syscall to be skipped. */
> - this_syscall = syscall_get_nr(current, task_pt_regs(current));
> + this_syscall = syscall_get_nr(current, current_pt_regs());
> if (this_syscall < 0)
> goto skip;
>
> @@ -1025,7 +1025,7 @@ static int __seccomp_filter(int this_syscall, const struct seccomp_data *sd,
> kernel_siginfo_t info;
>
> /* Show the original registers in the dump. */
> - syscall_rollback(current, task_pt_regs(current));
> + syscall_rollback(current, current_pt_regs());
> /* Trigger a manual coredump since do_exit skips it. */
> seccomp_init_siginfo(&info, this_syscall, data);
> do_coredump(&info);
> @@ -1060,7 +1060,7 @@ int __secure_computing(const struct seccomp_data *sd)
> return 0;
>
> this_syscall = sd ? sd->nr :
> - syscall_get_nr(current, task_pt_regs(current));
> + syscall_get_nr(current, current_pt_regs());
>
> switch (mode) {
> case SECCOMP_MODE_STRICT:
> --
> 2.26.2
>
--
Kees Cook
Powered by blists - more mailing lists