On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 2:43 PM, Danilo Krummrich
<danilokrummrich@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> proc_sys_link_fill_cache() does not need to check whether we're
> called for a link - it's already done by scan().
>
> Signed-off-by: Danilo Krummrich <danilokrummrich@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/proc/proc_sysctl.c | 11 +++++------
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/proc/proc_sysctl.c b/fs/proc/proc_sysctl.c
> index a0b6c647835e..7e7d9facb842 100644
> --- a/fs/proc/proc_sysctl.c
> +++ b/fs/proc/proc_sysctl.c
> @@ -707,17 +707,16 @@ static bool proc_sys_link_fill_cache(struct file *file,
> struct ctl_table *table)
> {
> bool ret = true;
> + int err = 0;
> head = sysctl_head_grab(head);
>
> if (IS_ERR(head))
> return false;
>
> - if (S_ISLNK(table->mode)) {
> - /* It is not an error if we can not follow the link ignore it */
> - int err = sysctl_follow_link(&head, &table);
> - if (err)
> - goto out;
> - }
> + /* It is not an error if we can not follow the link ignore it */
> + sysctl_follow_link(&head, &table);
Shouldn't this be err = sysctl_follow_link... ? Otherwise I don't see
where err is used.
-Kees
> + if (err)
> + goto out;
>
> ret = proc_sys_fill_cache(file, ctx, head, table);
> out:
> --
> 2.14.1
>
--
Kees Cook
Pixel Security
