Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Wed, 27 Nov 2019 01:43:13 -0800
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To:     Wang ShaoBo <bobo.shaobowang@huawei.com>
Cc:     cj.chengjian@huawei.com, mark.rutland@arm.com,
        huawei.libin@huawei.com, guohanjun@huawei.com, xiexiuqi@huawei.com,
        wcohen@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        mtk.manpages@gmail.com, wezhang@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sys_personality: Streamline code in sys_personality()
Message-ID: <20191127094313.GA11668@infradead.org>
References: <20191126094045.134654-1-bobo.shaobowang@huawei.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20191126094045.134654-1-bobo.shaobowang@huawei.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.1 (2019-06-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 05:40:45PM +0800, Wang ShaoBo wrote:
> SYSCALL_DEFINE1 in kernel/exec_domain.c looks like verbose,
> ksys_personality() can make it more concise.

What do you try to say with this sentence?  I can't really parse it.

> --- a/kernel/exec_domain.c
> +++ b/kernel/exec_domain.c
> @@ -37,10 +37,5 @@ module_init(proc_execdomains_init);
>  
>  SYSCALL_DEFINE1(personality, unsigned int, personality)
>  {
> -	unsigned int old = current->personality;
> -
> -	if (personality != 0xffffffff)
> -		set_personality(personality);
> -
> -	return old;
> +	return ksys_personality(personality);

This looks ok, but I'd much rather just kill ksys_personality and add
an optional arch hook to reject personality settings for the arm64
special case.