On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 04:45:41PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 01:03:04PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > diff --git a/include/linux/syscalls.h b/include/linux/syscalls.h
> > index 73810808cdf2..14312d334345 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/syscalls.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/syscalls.h
> > @@ -80,6 +80,7 @@ union bpf_attr;
> > #include <linux/unistd.h>
> > #include <linux/quota.h>
> > #include <linux/key.h>
> > +#include <linux/personality.h>
> > #include <trace/syscall.h>
> >
> > #ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_SYSCALL_WRAPPER
> > @@ -1277,4 +1278,14 @@ static inline long ksys_truncate(const char __user *pathname, loff_t length)
> > return do_sys_truncate(pathname, length);
> > }
> >
> > +static inline unsigned int ksys_personality(unsigned int personality)
> > +{
> > + unsigned int old = current->personality;
> > +
> > + if (personality != 0xffffffff)
> > + set_personality(personality);
> > +
> > + return old;
> > +}
> > +
> > #endif
>
> It looks like this is identical to sys_personality() in
> kernel/exec_domain.c. Should you call ksys_personality() from there
> directly (a few lines saved)?
I had originally done so [1], but Christophe preferred that I open-code
the logic [2].
Thanks,
Mark.
[1] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180514094640.27569-13-mark.rutland@xxxxxxx
[2] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180514120756.GA11638@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
