From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BFB96380FDC for ; Wed, 8 Jul 2026 14:14:37 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1783520079; cv=none; b=XqJyEbd9wlLEC6DKGjYlvtOpenwTUzrrlwQEWS0b6E4uwYqdTloq2aslFMxpVHNtK0iPIM7kw/s0qCpDzZY4IISs0VMVsP4l5wrAUOfs/sYGS4ceMyFN8dbf9MuZGmUZLytGj7R/P5Etv4/gHlVCGOjR9WT1nKtBY0TSzy1lk5k= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1783520079; c=relaxed/simple; bh=UcJqRS3BCvJERWt/2rhTg6WRrqiLojsXpI93tomCUbU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=EwTr+ZBgeBx5kxPE/KE1n92N4WRmTmualLs3VkueW9/HAHRU5kinpoC2Xzd5cfvLfvKjJoq3oH7MlTuWV+EC0kQ+/jc4LZ/p+Bi4xeRm71jzpNPZ6k4hwmUuC0CSpIiDwEsG1wcKUmqrIhrcDLEwB0376DNJl/yves0UtraznmM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=U0vSQSuu; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="U0vSQSuu" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1783520076; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=nK0N7jcrlyhb814x6LU8v4DK1VYHZ+HgGThdEsA9dhU=; b=U0vSQSuuofJomhWo9rD++viy75o7Xnw0VBikQlkDE0TwqV1xmj1rg+iLudIVJqxVq1n1iU uzpZ1InqQihyv+/kVT/iidir8UcbpRJWw3dst+9m0ImR3zTemw9PHzGlDJ9OOUFtVxUHcB zEVziKjGksFz+5RbBhizCAszipOBJyk= Received: from mx-prod-mc-01.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (ec2-54-186-198-63.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [54.186.198.63]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-615-tfAGZ0CINcinUP72MU2GTw-1; Wed, 08 Jul 2026 10:14:31 -0400 X-MC-Unique: tfAGZ0CINcinUP72MU2GTw-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: tfAGZ0CINcinUP72MU2GTw_1783520070 Received: from mx-prod-int-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (mx-prod-int-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com [10.30.177.12]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mx-prod-mc-01.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D67731955DBF; Wed, 8 Jul 2026 14:14:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from fedora (unknown [10.44.33.83]) by mx-prod-int-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 49C261956086; Wed, 8 Jul 2026 14:14:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: by fedora (nbSMTP-1.00) for uid 1000 oleg@redhat.com; Wed, 8 Jul 2026 16:14:28 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2026 16:14:23 +0200 From: Oleg Nesterov To: Georgia Garcia Cc: Bradley Morgan , apparmor@lists.ubuntu.com, jmorris@namei.org, john.johansen@canonical.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, paul@paul-moore.com, serge@hallyn.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] apparmor: use SEND_SIG_NOINFO instead of NULL in aa_audit() Message-ID: References: <65E9B858-C580-41A3-9B39-B383ED5F0ACF@grrlz.net> <9f37884fc0922254c3d3708794cf1272f4fabdfc.camel@canonical.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9f37884fc0922254c3d3708794cf1272f4fabdfc.camel@canonical.com> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.0 on 10.30.177.12 On 07/08, Georgia Garcia wrote: > > On Sun, 2026-07-05 at 20:48 +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > On 07/05, Bradley Morgan wrote: > > > > > > > SEND_SIG_NOINFO is defined as ((struct kernel_siginfo *) 0), so passing > > > > NULL works, but: > > > > > > > > - this works "by accident" and looks as if the caller doesn't understand > > > > the signal sending API. > > > > > > > > - more importantly, this hides the usage of SEND_SIG_NOINFO from grep, > > > > and this is really bad. > > > - also drop the now redundant (void) > > > > Yes, but the "void" cast was never necessary, I guess. > > > > and just in case... To me the usage of SEND_SIG_NOINFO here doesn't look right with > > or without this change. Perhaps I am wrong, but please lets not discuss this right > > now, this connects to other cleanups I have in mind. > > > > Yes, I agree. Perhaps SEND_SIG_PRIV would be more appropriate here. Yes, this is what I meant. And I think the same is true for most of (all?) users of send_sig(sig, task, priv = 0), at least when task is current. I'll return to this later. Thanks for your ACK! Oleg.