Hey On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 9:01 PM, Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 03, 2016 at 08:04:26PM +0200, David Herrmann wrote: >> @@ -98,13 +99,14 @@ int drm_clients_info(struct seq_file *m, void *data) >> >> rcu_read_lock(); /* locks pid_task()->comm */ >> task = pid_task(priv->pid, PIDTYPE_PID); >> + uid = priv->filp ? priv->filp->f_cred->euid : GLOBAL_ROOT_UID; >> seq_printf(m, "%20s %5d %3d %c %c %5d %10u\n", >> task ? task->comm : "<unknown>", >> pid_vnr(priv->pid), >> priv->minor->index, >> drm_is_current_master(priv) ? 'y' : 'n', >> priv->authenticated ? 'y' : 'n', >> - from_kuid_munged(seq_user_ns(m), priv->uid), >> + from_kuid_munged(seq_user_ns(m), uid), >> priv->magic); >> rcu_read_unlock(); >> } >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_ioctl.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_ioctl.c >> index 33af4a5..49cd835 100644 >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_ioctl.c >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_ioctl.c >> @@ -191,7 +191,9 @@ static int drm_getclient(struct drm_device *dev, void *data, >> client->auth = file_priv->authenticated; >> client->pid = pid_vnr(file_priv->pid); >> client->uid = from_kuid_munged(current_user_ns(), >> - file_priv->uid); >> + file_priv->filp ? >> + file_priv->filp->f_cred->euid : >> + GLOBAL_ROOT_UID); > > Why can't we use task_euid(pid_task(file_priv->pid)) here as well? task_euid() changes semantics. With this patch I just tried to get rid of "filp" usage, but keep semantics, so the ABI does not suddently change. Note that both calls are actually changed in follow-ups. "uid" is just cleared to "overflowuid", since no-one ever looks at that field. And "pid" is set to "pid_vnr(current)". However, I explicitly split those patches to make sure it is easier to bisect. Thanks David _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
