Re: [TOMOYO #5 18/18] LSM expansion for TOMOYO Linux.

[Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>]

Hello.

Thank you for your feedback.

Paul Moore wrote:
> With this patch the 'cpu_flags' variable will be used in two different 
> if-blocks in this function and declared locally within each block.  Please 
> move the 'cpu_flags' declaration to the top of the function so it only needs 
> to be declared once.
I see.

> I might be missing something here, but why do you need to do a skb_peek() 
> again?  You already have the skb and the sock, just do the unlink.
The skb might be already dequeued by other thread while I slept inside
security_post_recv_datagram().

> Two things.  First you can probably just call kfree_skb() instead of 
> skb_free_datagram().
So far, there is no difference between skb_free_datagram() and kfree_skb().

| void skb_free_datagram(struct sock *sk, struct sk_buff *skb)
| {
|         kfree_skb(skb);
| }

udp_recvmsg() thinks it might not be ok to directly call kfree_skb().
But you and skb_kill_datagram() think it is ok to directly call kfree_skb(),
I will do so.

> Second, why not move the 'no_peek' code to just before 'no_packet'?
Oh, I didn't notice I can insert here. Now I can also move the rest code like

|		error = security_post_recv_datagram(sk, skb, flags);
|		if (error)
|                       goto force_dequeue;

|         } while (!wait_for_packet(sk, err, &timeo));
|
|         return NULL;
| force_dequeue:
|         /* dequeue if MSG_PEEK is set. */
| no_packet:
|         *err = error;
|         return NULL;

to reduce indentation.

Thank you.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/