From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: "Jeff Layton" <jlayton@kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>,
"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"Daniel P . Berrangé" <berrange@redhat.com>,
"Kate Stewart" <kstewart@linuxfoundation.org>,
"Dan Williams" <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
"Philippe Ombredanne" <pombredanne@nexb.com>,
"Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] locks: change POSIX lock ownership on execve when files_struct is displaced
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2018 11:14:25 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180322111424.GE30522@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87bmfgvg8w.fsf@xmission.com>
On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 12:19:59AM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org> writes:
>
> > From: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
> >
> > POSIX mandates that open fds and their associated file locks should be
> > preserved across an execve. This works, unless the process is
> > multithreaded at the time that execve is called.
>
> Would this perhaps work better if we moved unshare_files to after or
> inside of de_thread. That would remove any cases where fd->count is > 1
> simply because you are multi-threaded. It would only leave the strange
> cases where files struct is shared between different processes.
So during the probing of binfmts, etc. the descriptor table would be modifiable
by other threads?
flush_old_exec() is far too late in execve()...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-03-22 11:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-03-17 14:25 [PATCH] locks: change POSIX lock ownership on execve when files_struct is displaced Jeff Layton
2018-03-17 15:05 ` Al Viro
2018-03-17 15:43 ` Jeff Layton
2018-03-17 15:52 ` Al Viro
2018-03-17 19:28 ` Jeff Layton
2018-03-17 16:58 ` [PATCH v2] " Jeff Layton
[not found] ` <87bmfgvg8w.fsf@xmission.com>
2018-03-22 11:14 ` Al Viro [this message]
[not found] ` <871sgcvfh7.fsf@xmission.com>
2018-03-22 10:57 ` Jeff Layton
2018-04-02 12:56 ` Jeff Layton
2018-04-03 17:22 ` Eric W. Biederman
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180322111424.GE30522@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=berrange@redhat.com \
--cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jlayton@kernel.org \
--cc=kstewart@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pombredanne@nexb.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).