On 07/30/2012 09:58 AM, Kees Cook wrote: > The core ptrace access checking routine already holds the task lock, > so there is no need to use get_task_comm() which just tries to take the > lock again. Drop its use and access current->comm directly. > > Reported-by: Fengguang Wu <[email protected]> > Suggested-by: Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <[email protected]> yep, looks good
Acked-by: John Johansen <[email protected]> > --- > security/yama/yama_lsm.c | 6 ++---- > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/security/yama/yama_lsm.c b/security/yama/yama_lsm.c > index 83554ee..20a68ca 100644 > --- a/security/yama/yama_lsm.c > +++ b/security/yama/yama_lsm.c > @@ -279,12 +279,10 @@ static int yama_ptrace_access_check(struct task_struct > *child, > } > > if (rc) { > - char name[sizeof(current->comm)]; > + /* task_lock is held by the caller, so use comm directly. */ > printk_ratelimited(KERN_NOTICE > "ptrace of pid %d was attempted by: %s (pid %d)\n", > - child->pid, > - get_task_comm(name, current), > - current->pid); > + child->pid, current->comm, current->pid); > } > > return rc; > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
