On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 04:49:46PM -0500, Micka�l Sala�n wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 03, 2023 at 04:57:11PM +0100, G�nther Noack wrote:
> > This call is now going through a function pointer,
> > and it is not as obvious any more that it will be inlined.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: G�nther Noack <gnoack@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > security/landlock/ruleset.c | 5 +++--
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/security/landlock/ruleset.c b/security/landlock/ruleset.c
> > index ffedc99f2b68..fd348633281c 100644
> > --- a/security/landlock/ruleset.c
> > +++ b/security/landlock/ruleset.c
> > @@ -724,10 +724,11 @@ landlock_init_layer_masks(const struct landlock_ruleset *const domain,
> > for (layer_level = 0; layer_level < domain->num_layers; layer_level++) {
> > const unsigned long access_req = access_request;
> > unsigned long access_bit;
> > + access_mask_t access_mask =
>
> You can make it const and move it below the other const.
Done.
> > + get_access_mask(domain, layer_level);
> >
> > for_each_set_bit(access_bit, &access_req, num_access) {
> > - if (BIT_ULL(access_bit) &
> > - get_access_mask(domain, layer_level)) {
> > + if (BIT_ULL(access_bit) & access_mask) {
> > (*layer_masks)[access_bit] |=
> > BIT_ULL(layer_level);
> > handled_accesses |= BIT_ULL(access_bit);
> > --
> > 2.42.0.869.gea05f2083d-goog
> >
