Re: [RFC PATCH 5 7/7] KEYS: exec request key within service thread of key creator

[Ian Kent]

On Thu, 2015-04-02 at 13:58 +0100, David Howells wrote:
> Ian Kent <raven@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > +
> > +	/* Namespace token */
> > +	int umh_token;
> 
> If you could put it after data_len so that all the smaller-than-wordsize
> fields are together for better packing.

OK.

> 
> > +		umh_wq_put_token(key->umh_token);
> 
> Does gc.c need an extra #include for this?

Umm ... you'd think so, wonder how it compiled without kmod.h ....

> 
> > +	/* If running within a container use the container namespace */
> > +	if (current->nsproxy->net_ns != &init_net)
> > +		key->umh_token = umh_wq_get_token(0, "keys");
> 
> So keys live in the networking namespace?

Perhaps checking the pid namespace would make more sense?

> 
> > -	ret = call_usermodehelper_keys(argv[0], argv, envp, keyring,
> > -				       UMH_WAIT_PROC);
> > +	/* If running within a container use the container namespace */
> > +	if (key->umh_token)
> > +		ret = call_usermodehelper_keys_service(argv[0], argv, envp,
> > +						       keyring, key->umh_token,
> > +						       UMH_WAIT_PROC);
> > +	else
> > +		ret = call_usermodehelper_keys(argv[0], argv, envp,
> > +					       keyring, UMH_WAIT_PROC);
> 
> call_usermodehelper_keys_service() would appear to be superfluous.  If
> key->umh_token is 0, you call call_usermodehelper_keys() which then calls
> call_usermodehelper_keys_service() with a 0 token...

Yeah, not really worth the additional function. IIRC there are no other
callers of call_usermodehelper_keys().

> 
> David


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/