From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 20AB217B50A; Mon, 27 Jan 2025 19:17:56 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1738005477; cv=none; b=QsuzMFLCBbriOkcW+QM708X5JsS0iXQhyxPaI5R2R+Uc5uzHRoyFVMyCYQ5ydqkEyvM6z+XwWki5hT20PBKdRXZm3QdcW7fLQRjdA6JzeHd/Oz7j4VGKUFrNtCCIMHpczmSuAUDjW/el6r4j83BxK+4iqVeH7evZyuabtsyq7F8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1738005477; c=relaxed/simple; bh=r9YoCzMn+S7Rp21hkZ42NQlHWCOwaqNEe0i3f9P/rhc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=RQ/YqLrq3YJSYtxcAvvi6u6igPxspWYxkfpSNO7ItpR+KnZ9jGNMg5JJgnqQJyl8hmaX0roLWXEZR1b4t4Ax8CS/Q78SkG67HqB+kS8yPYY+7AIcUmUH/2I5uCWQATSrB2HKYwCQLm4wLBBqPf5ArNBH1/vMycdo+NohLXPTUUQ= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=lFxj5rfm; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="lFxj5rfm" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 86628C4CED2; Mon, 27 Jan 2025 19:17:56 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1738005476; bh=r9YoCzMn+S7Rp21hkZ42NQlHWCOwaqNEe0i3f9P/rhc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=lFxj5rfm0IvZCUg/tO+0gBKuTznDKVK80+04mTG8YN1sFlvh2MJwAuIZMiTjG9A6i Zj3XKiNoNTB3HjMLBZfUs/wmfkT0rscnJ518VQLQjH6La8oJDOjP0V+WgMTgys1SZR jiPgowA8IKkJUH0X7Sqta7HcPXUC40RQmwa+6vHSadAxGbi7LpSQG0i83yFSsj6e09 vp+dwfJiiCBLQdkpMVTuZ3no03/rXMX42JsDnDG7o4aguNZutfDGGdO9mG9fvXoAIY 1/g3PpUQh2x1t2aEEYavbMnvun0Md/mwcEmOfVW860NZYefJiCQUke9jFTVpD/gtxU JPFv+07PAiAtw== Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2025 11:17:52 -0800 From: Kees Cook To: Oleg Nesterov Cc: Andy Lutomirski , Will Drewry , Thomas Bogendoerfer , Madhavan Srinivasan , Michael Ellerman , Thomas Gleixner , Peter Zijlstra , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] seccomp: kill the dead code in the !CONFIG_HAVE_ARCH_SECCOMP_FILTER version of __secure_computing() Message-ID: <202501271117.E00B5250@keescook> References: <20250120134409.GA21241@redhat.com> <20250120134452.GA21275@redhat.com> <202501201353.168E6AAC8@keescook> <20250121143038.GB3422@redhat.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-mips@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20250121143038.GB3422@redhat.com> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 03:30:39PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > How about > > __secure_computing() > { > return secure_computing_strict(syscall_get_nr(...)); > } > > in the "#ifndef CONFIG_HAVE_ARCH_SECCOMP_FILTER" section near > secure_computing_strict() in kernel/seccomp.c ? Yeah, that should be good. -- Kees Cook