[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20231211155836.4qb4pfcfaguhuzo7@moria.home.lan>
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2023 10:58:36 -0500
From: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev>
To: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
Cc: Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@...ton.me>,
Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>,
Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>,
Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>,
Wedson Almeida Filho <wedsonaf@...il.com>,
Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>,
Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>,
Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...sung.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>,
Todd Kjos <tkjos@...roid.com>,
Martijn Coenen <maco@...roid.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
Carlos Llamas <cmllamas@...gle.com>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Daniel Xu <dxu@...uu.xyz>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/7] rust: file: add `Kuid` wrapper
On Fri, Dec 08, 2023 at 08:43:19AM -0800, Boqun Feng wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 08, 2023 at 04:40:09PM +0000, Benno Lossin wrote:
> > On 12/6/23 12:59, Alice Ryhl wrote:
> > > + /// Returns the given task's pid in the current pid namespace.
> > > + pub fn pid_in_current_ns(&self) -> Pid {
> > > + // SAFETY: Calling `task_active_pid_ns` with the current task is always safe.
> > > + let namespace = unsafe { bindings::task_active_pid_ns(bindings::get_current()) };
> >
> > Why not create a safe wrapper for `bindings::get_current()`?
> > This patch series has three occurrences of `get_current`, so I think it
> > should be ok to add a wrapper.
> > I would also prefer to move the call to `bindings::get_current()` out of
> > the `unsafe` block.
>
> FWIW, we have a current!() macro, we should use it here.
Why does it need to be a macro?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists