[PATCH 3/4] listmount: small changes in semantics

[Miklos Szeredi]

On Wed, 6 Dec 2023 at 20:58, Serge E. Hallyn <serge at hallyn.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 05:03:34PM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote:

> > -     if (!is_path_reachable(m, mnt->mnt_root, &rootmnt))
> > -             return capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN) ? 0 : -EPERM;
> > +     if (!capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN) &&
>
> Was there a reason to do the capable check first?  In general,
> checking capable() when not needed is frowned upon, as it will
> set the PF_SUPERPRIV flag.
>

I synchronized the permission checking with statmount() without
thinking about the order.   I guess we can change the order back in
both syscalls?

I also don't understand the reason behind the using the _noaudit()
variant.  Christian?

Thanks,
Miklos