[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2020 13:49:23 +0200
From: Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Sargun Dhillon <sargun@...gun.me>,
Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>,
Tycho Andersen <tycho@...ho.ws>,
David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@...har.com>,
Matt Denton <mpdenton@...gle.com>,
Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, Chris Palmer <palmer@...gle.com>,
Robert Sesek <rsesek@...gle.com>,
Giuseppe Scrivano <gscrivan@...hat.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
linux-api@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 3/7] fs: Add receive_fd() wrapper for __receive_fd()
On Mon, Jul 06, 2020 at 01:17:16PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> For both pidfd and seccomp, the __user pointer is not used. Update
> __receive_fd() to make writing to ufd optional via a NULL check. However,
> for the receive_fd_user() wrapper, ufd is NULL checked so an -EFAULT
> can be returned to avoid changing the SCM_RIGHTS interface behavior. Add
> new wrapper receive_fd() for pidfd and seccomp that does not use the ufd
> argument. For the new helper, the allocated fd needs to be returned on
> success. Update the existing callers to handle it.
>
> Reviewed-by: Sargun Dhillon <sargun@...gun.me>
> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
> ---
Hm, I'm not sure why 2/7 and 3/7 aren't just one patch but ok. :)
Acked-by: Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists