On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 09:33:31PM +0200, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
> If 'write' is 0, we can avoid a call to spin_lock/spin_unlock.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jail...@wanadoo.fr>
Thanks for the patch!
Acked-by: Luis R. Rodriguez <mcg...@kernel.org>
I'll bounce a copy to Andrew for integration next.
Luis
> ---
> kernel/umh.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/umh.c b/kernel/umh.c
> index 6ff9905250ff..18e5fa4b0e71 100644
> --- a/kernel/umh.c
> +++ b/kernel/umh.c
> @@ -537,14 +537,14 @@ static int proc_cap_handler(struct ctl_table *table,
> int write,
> /*
> * Drop everything not in the new_cap (but don't add things)
> */
> - spin_lock(&umh_sysctl_lock);
> if (write) {
> + spin_lock(&umh_sysctl_lock);
> if (table->data == CAP_BSET)
> usermodehelper_bset =
> cap_intersect(usermodehelper_bset, new_cap);
> if (table->data == CAP_PI)
> usermodehelper_inheritable =
> cap_intersect(usermodehelper_inheritable, new_cap);
> + spin_unlock(&umh_sysctl_lock);
> }
> - spin_unlock(&umh_sysctl_lock);
>
> return 0;
> }
> --
> 2.14.1
>
>
--
Luis Rodriguez, SUSE LINUX GmbH
Maxfeldstrasse 5; D-90409 Nuernberg
