[External] Re: [PATCH] selinux: remove redundant msg_msg_alloc_security
Huaisheng HS1 Ye
yehs1 at lenovo.com
Sun Jan 12 15:45:37 UTC 2020
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Moore <paul at paul-moore.com>
> Sent: Saturday, January 11, 2020 12:50 AM
> On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 10:13 AM Stephen Smalley <sds at tycho.nsa.gov> wrote:
> > On 1/10/20 4:58 AM, Huaisheng Ye wrote:
> > > From: Huaisheng Ye <yehs1 at lenovo.com>
> > >
> > > selinux_msg_msg_alloc_security only calls msg_msg_alloc_security but
> > > do nothing else. And also msg_msg_alloc_security is just used by the
> > > former.
> > >
> > > Remove the redundant function to simplify the code.
> >
> > This seems to also be true of other _alloc_security functions,
> > probably due to historical reasons. Further, at least some of these
> > functions no longer perform any allocation; they are just
> > initialization functions now that allocation has been taken to the LSM
> > framework, so possibly could be renamed and made to return void at some point.
>
> I've noticed the same thing on a few occasions, I've just never bothered to put
> the fixes into a patch. We might as well do that now, at least for the redundant
> code bits; I'll leave the return code issue for another time as that would cross
> LSM boundaries and that really isn't appropriate in the -rc5 timeframe IMHO.
>
> I'll put something together once I finish up the patch/review backlog from the
> past few days. Looking quickly with a regex, it would appear that
> inode_alloc_security(), file_alloc_security(), and
> superblock_alloc_security() are all candidates. While not an allocator, we can
> probably get rid of inode_doinit() as well.
Besides, it looks like selinux_nlmsg_perm is candidate too.
Just send a patch for this function.
Cheers,
Huaisheng Ye
More information about the Linux-security-module-archive
mailing list