From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chris Wright Subject: Re: [PATCH] linux 2.9.10-rc1: Fix oops in unix_dgram_sendmsg when using SELinux and SOCK_SEQPACKET Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 23:19:43 -0800 Message-ID: <20041118231943.B14339@build.pdx.osdl.net> References: <20041118084449.Z14339@build.pdx.osdl.net> <419D6746.2020603@blueyonder.co.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Chris Wright , James Morris , netdev@oss.sgi.com, Stephen Smalley , lkml , "David S. Miller" Return-path: To: Ross Kendall Axe Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <419D6746.2020603@blueyonder.co.uk>; from ross.axe@blueyonder.co.uk on Fri, Nov 19, 2004 at 03:23:50AM +0000 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org * Ross Kendall Axe (ross.axe@blueyonder.co.uk) wrote: > Taking this idea further, couldn't we split unix_dgram_sendmsg into 2 > functions, do_unix_dgram_sendmsg and do_unix_connectionless_sendmsg (and > similarly for unix_stream_sendmsg), then all we'd need is: > > > static int do_unix_dgram_sendmsg(...); > static int do_unix_stream_sendmsg(...); > static int do_unix_connectionless_sendmsg(...); > static int do_unix_connectional_sendmsg(...); We could probably break it down to better functions and helpers, but I'm not sure that's quite the breakdown. That looks to me like an indirect way to pass a flag which is already encoded in the ops and sk_type. At anyrate, for 2.6.10 the changes should be small and obvious. Better refactoring should be left for 2.6.11. thanks, -chris -- Linux Security Modules http://lsm.immunix.org http://lsm.bkbits.net