Re: [PATCH 1/5] seccomp: Add find_notification helper
From: Christian Brauner <hidden>
Date: 2020-05-25 13:26:18
Also in:
lkml
On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 04:39:38PM -0700, Sargun Dhillon wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
This adds a helper which can iterate through a seccomp_filter to find a notification matching an ID. It removes several replicated chunks of code. Signed-off-by: Sargun Dhillon <redacted> Cc: Matt Denton <redacted> Cc: Kees Cook <redacted>, Cc: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>, Cc: Robert Sesek <redacted>, Cc: Chris Palmer <redacted> Cc: Christian Brauner <redacted> Cc: Tycho Andersen <redacted> --- kernel/seccomp.c | 38 +++++++++++++++++++++----------------- 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)diff --git a/kernel/seccomp.c b/kernel/seccomp.c index 55a6184f5990..f6ce94b7a167 100644 --- a/kernel/seccomp.c +++ b/kernel/seccomp.c@@ -1021,10 +1021,25 @@ static int seccomp_notify_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *file) return 0; } +/* must be called with notif_lock held */ +static inline struct seccomp_knotif * +find_notification(struct seccomp_filter *filter, u64 id) +{ + struct seccomp_knotif *cur; + + list_for_each_entry(cur, &filter->notif->notifications, list) { + if (cur->id == id) + return cur; + } + + return NULL; +} + + static long seccomp_notify_recv(struct seccomp_filter *filter, void __user *buf) { - struct seccomp_knotif *knotif = NULL, *cur; + struct seccomp_knotif *knotif, *cur; struct seccomp_notif unotif; ssize_t ret;@@ -1078,14 +1093,8 @@ static long seccomp_notify_recv(struct seccomp_filter *filter, * may have died when we released the lock, so we need to make * sure it's still around. */ - knotif = NULL; mutex_lock(&filter->notify_lock); - list_for_each_entry(cur, &filter->notif->notifications, list) { - if (cur->id == unotif.id) { - knotif = cur; - break; - } - } + knotif = find_notification(filter, unotif.id); if (knotif) { knotif->state = SECCOMP_NOTIFY_INIT;@@ -1150,7 +1159,7 @@ static long seccomp_notify_send(struct seccomp_filter *filter, static long seccomp_notify_id_valid(struct seccomp_filter *filter, void __user *buf) { - struct seccomp_knotif *knotif = NULL; + struct seccomp_knotif *knotif; u64 id; long ret;@@ -1162,15 +1171,10 @@ static long seccomp_notify_id_valid(struct seccomp_filter *filter, return ret; ret = -ENOENT; - list_for_each_entry(knotif, &filter->notif->notifications, list) { - if (knotif->id == id) { - if (knotif->state == SECCOMP_NOTIFY_SENT) - ret = 0; - goto out; - } - } + knotif = find_notification(filter, id); + if (knotif && knotif->state == SECCOMP_NOTIFY_SENT) + ret = 0;
Coul be a little nicer to have this be: if (knotif && knotif->state == SECCOMP_NOTIFY_SENT) ret = 0; else ret = -ENOENT; or, if you want to keep the assignment out of the lock: ret = -ENOENT; ret = mutex_lock_interruptible(&filter->notify_lock); if (ret < 0) return ret; knotif = find_notification(filter, id); if (knotif && knotif->state == SECCOMP_NOTIFY_SENT) ret = 0; otherwise looks like a good cleanup to me.