From 90383cc07895183c75a0db2460301c2ffd912359 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2024 11:15:33 -0800
Subject: exec: Distinguish in_execve from in_exec

Just to help distinguish the fs->in_exec flag from the current->in_execve
flag, add comments in check_unsafe_exec() and copy_fs() for more
context. Also note that in_execve is only used by TOMOYO now.

Cc: Kentaro Takeda <takedakn@nttdata.co.jp>
Cc: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: Eric Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org
Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
---
 kernel/fork.c | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

(limited to 'kernel')

diff --git a/kernel/fork.c b/kernel/fork.c
index 47ff3b35352e..0d944e92a43f 100644
--- a/kernel/fork.c
+++ b/kernel/fork.c
@@ -1748,6 +1748,7 @@ static int copy_fs(unsigned long clone_flags, struct task_struct *tsk)
 	if (clone_flags & CLONE_FS) {
 		/* tsk->fs is already what we want */
 		spin_lock(&fs->lock);
+		/* "users" and "in_exec" locked for check_unsafe_exec() */
 		if (fs->in_exec) {
 			spin_unlock(&fs->lock);
 			return -EAGAIN;
-- 
cgit v1.2.3-58-ga151