Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Thu, 21 Oct 2021 09:02:04 -0700
From:   Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To:     "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
        Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        Jonas Bonn <jonas@southpole.se>,
        Stefan Kristiansson <stefan.kristiansson@saunalahti.fi>,
        Stafford Horne <shorne@gmail.com>,
        openrisc@lists.librecores.org, Nick Hu <nickhu@andestech.com>,
        Greentime Hu <green.hu@gmail.com>,
        Vincent Chen <deanbo422@gmail.com>,
        Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>,
        Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
        Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
        linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
        Yoshinori Sato <ysato@users.sourceforge.jp>,
        Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org, Chris Zankel <chris@zankel.net>,
        Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/20] exit: Remove calls of do_exit after noreturn
 versions of die
Message-ID: <202110210858.41719190D2@keescook>
References: <87y26nmwkb.fsf@disp2133>
 <20211020174406.17889-2-ebiederm@xmission.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20211020174406.17889-2-ebiederm@xmission.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 12:43:48PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> On nds32, openrisc, s390, sh, and xtensa the function die never
> returns.  Mark die __noreturn so that no one expects die to return.
> Remove the do_exit calls after die as they will never be reached.

Maybe note that the "bust_spinlocks" calls are also redundant, since
they're in die(). I note that is a "mismatch" between the do_kill()
in die() (SIGSEGV) and after die() (SIGKILL). This patch makes no
behavioral change (the first caller would "win"), but I thought I'd note
it in case some architecture would prefer a different signal.

Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>

-Kees

-- 
Kees Cook