From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>,
viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, berrange@redhat.com,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] exec: separate thread_count for files_struct
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2018 22:45:09 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87d0tbn99m.fsf@xmission.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180917152424.GA25173@redhat.com> (Oleg Nesterov's message of "Mon, 17 Sep 2018 17:24:24 +0200")
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> writes:
> On 09/16, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>>
>> Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> writes:
>>
>> > As for binder.c, in this case we probably actually want to unshare ->files
>> > on exec so we can ignore it?
>>
>> Looking at the binder case it only captures ->files on mmap. Exec
>> ditches the mmap. So if the order of operations are correct than
>> the dropping of the old mm will also drop the count on files_struct
>> held by binder.
>>
>> So semantically binder should not effect locks on exec,
>
> Agreed, but it does.
>
> Before your "[PATCH 0/3] exec: Moving unshare_files_struct" unshare_files()
> is called before exec_mmap().
>
> And even with this series we can have another CLONE_VM process.
>
> Howver, I think this doesn't really matter. binder does __fd_install(files),
> so if it actually has a reference to execing_task->files, I think it should
> be unshared anyway.
>
>> In short as long as we get the oder of operations correct we should be
>> able to safely ignore binder, and not have binder affect the results of
>> this code.
>
> Agreed.
I may have spoken too soon. Binder uses schedule_work to call
put_files_struct from munmap. So the files->count may still be elevated
after the mm is put. Ick.
Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-09-17 20:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-09-14 10:53 [PATCH v3 0/3] exec: fix passing of file locks across execve in multithreaded processes Jeff Layton
2018-09-14 10:53 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] exec: separate thread_count for files_struct Jeff Layton
2018-09-15 16:04 ` Oleg Nesterov
2018-09-16 16:10 ` Eric W. Biederman
2018-09-17 15:24 ` Oleg Nesterov
2018-09-17 20:45 ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
2018-09-14 10:53 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] exec: delay clone(CLONE_FILES) if task associated with current files_struct is exec'ing Jeff Layton
2018-09-14 10:53 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] exec: do unshare_files after de_thread Jeff Layton
2018-09-15 16:37 ` Oleg Nesterov
2018-09-16 16:49 ` Eric W. Biederman
2018-09-17 15:28 ` Oleg Nesterov
2018-09-16 16:59 ` Eric W. Biederman
2018-09-16 17:38 ` [RFC][PATCH 0/3] exec: Moving unshare_files_struct Eric W. Biederman
2018-09-16 17:39 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/3] exec: Move unshare_files down to avoid locks being dropped on exec Eric W. Biederman
2018-09-17 15:49 ` Oleg Nesterov
2018-09-16 17:40 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/3] exec: Simplify unshare_files Eric W. Biederman
2018-09-17 16:23 ` Oleg Nesterov
2018-09-17 20:26 ` Eric W. Biederman
2018-09-16 17:41 ` [RFC][PATCH 3/3] exec: Remove reset_files_struct Eric W. Biederman
2018-09-17 15:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 0/3] exec: Moving unshare_files_struct Oleg Nesterov
2018-09-18 22:18 ` Eric W. Biederman
2018-09-17 16:24 ` Jeff Layton
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=87d0tbn99m.fsf@xmission.com \
--to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=berrange@redhat.com \
--cc=jlayton@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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).