From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09602C433DF for ; Mon, 25 May 2020 21:41:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-1.mimecast.com [205.139.110.61]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4E2C2206C3 for ; Mon, 25 May 2020 21:41:01 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="Vzd0XCRu" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 4E2C2206C3 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux-audit-bounces@redhat.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1590442860; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:list-id:list-help: list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-post; bh=XidqXOGKp8YqSUFlsP3xmsibkDTMNsuhFGBPNhuwFwg=; b=Vzd0XCRucn8XeMP9z5dgUweWIotouW4DwoeE8R+uaTZZ2IwR4wxtqsfgMLwV0cVoBCi9LD 9BCP/iZSJfW+kPpMxZimOjml05hfU3uPxCVg7WQfC+2QSoEtBEKt9OZjCURQXqZQvEbA1t H1wOyPaK6j2L70L82KSi7J8ibCRd5SA= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-176-lwrhibRLNb6N5flobhxq7A-1; Mon, 25 May 2020 17:40:57 -0400 X-MC-Unique: lwrhibRLNb6N5flobhxq7A-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2902E460; Mon, 25 May 2020 21:40:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from colo-mx.corp.redhat.com (colo-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.21]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 247925D9E4; Mon, 25 May 2020 21:40:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists01.pubmisc.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com (lists01.pubmisc.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.19.33]) by colo-mx.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94E0D54D29; Mon, 25 May 2020 21:40:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.5]) by lists01.pubmisc.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id 04PI4kon030079 for ; Mon, 25 May 2020 14:04:46 -0400 Received: by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) id C4F9342AD2; Mon, 25 May 2020 18:04:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast05.extmail.prod.ext.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.55.21]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C0B7642AD8 for ; Mon, 25 May 2020 18:04:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com [207.211.31.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CFDDA829DF9 for ; Mon, 25 May 2020 18:04:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pf1-f193.google.com (mail-pf1-f193.google.com [209.85.210.193]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-47-tOzmQU7fMT-Bl_ykmV6jUw-1; Mon, 25 May 2020 14:04:40 -0400 X-MC-Unique: tOzmQU7fMT-Bl_ykmV6jUw-1 Received: by mail-pf1-f193.google.com with SMTP id n18so9080756pfa.2; Mon, 25 May 2020 11:04:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=PAB8InMNdHtw1sY8dxXS0+RSR7K8nRd/W2k8ffZ4Q3w=; b=h9o4y6WGZ0Mxyt4icda8ngwY+stcW8V1L2AJifhNlnzeqBRj5IX0O/ywJP4QapJeA7 Cr2weTxJ8xsP6Q1gwONuc/2FTJq5AVNzdVL4ll+ZaOrjThAvpexHDq9Pu1mBIJROIczM 8T/9tApeuH5RRdmA3zx8q++1itXA9uicJv6w7VJASF3tpF9nFOkNYGABB62HfBoY+FDg S/y3UCnvxRFqFsiueD7NNA4DoehDQnUNjrECsEXTMCoFyrccrbQbOpC5vMqvApWD0qf0 BDGsutT06mvFxWANo0QOd6WAjyHA6BL709JlUsi2vMpaM57xIiKaGGly2kcL1Oo2jC+w nWpA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531VToi+kYOkJ/gvKatnTEuMrNEMoHSLgrRUPsMqpxjzEy9czfj6 DLZcS40ZgFxY9wt10DHFoXj8FBWnT0nvJA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyezKLdoitt2fakdRXnl6cL2BqFHQ3TU7kenobJ/b2iPakDh/rya/euYiDtrb6NEdZdJ/Onzg== X-Received: by 2002:a63:4cc:: with SMTP id 195mr27470706pge.294.1590429878562; Mon, 25 May 2020 11:04:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from workstation-LAP.localdomain ([103.87.56.138]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k2sm13946901pfd.108.2020.05.25.11.04.28 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Mon, 25 May 2020 11:04:37 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 25 May 2020 23:34:21 +0530 From: Amol Grover To: Richard Guy Briggs Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3 RESEND] sched: Remove __rcu annotation from cred pointer Message-ID: <20200525180421.GA19@workstation-LAP.localdomain> References: <20200402055640.6677-1-frextrite@gmail.com> <20200524081117.GA29@workstation-LAP.localdomain> <20200525131741.s6lgb263fpo5uszk@madcap2.tricolour.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200525131741.s6lgb263fpo5uszk@madcap2.tricolour.ca> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) X-Mimecast-Spam-Signature: yes X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.11.54.5 X-loop: linux-audit@redhat.com X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 25 May 2020 17:40:48 -0400 Cc: Juri Lelli , Peter Zijlstra , David Howells , Joel Fernandes , Vincent Guittot , James Morris , Madhuparna Bhowmik , Ingo Molnar , Mel Gorman , linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linuxfoundation.org, "Paul E . McKenney" , Jann Horn , Steven Rostedt , Shakeel Butt , Thomas Gleixner , Dietmar Eggemann , Ben Segall , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-audit@redhat.com, "Eric W . Biederman" , Andrew Morton X-BeenThere: linux-audit@redhat.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: junk List-Id: Linux Audit Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: linux-audit-bounces@redhat.com Errors-To: linux-audit-bounces@redhat.com X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.14 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 09:17:41AM -0400, Richard Guy Briggs wrote: > On 2020-05-24 13:41, Amol Grover wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 02, 2020 at 11:26:38AM +0530, Amol Grover wrote: > > > task_struct::cred (subjective credentials) is *always* used > > > task-synchronously, hence, does not require RCU semantics. > > > > > > task_struct::real_cred (objective credentials) can be used in > > > RCU context and its __rcu annotation is retained. > > > > > > However, task_struct::cred and task_struct::real_cred *may* > > > point to the same object, hence, the object pointed to by > > > task_struct::cred *may* have RCU delayed freeing. > > > > > > Suggested-by: Jann Horn > > > Co-developed-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) > > > Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) > > > Signed-off-by: Amol Grover > > > > Hello everyone, > > > > Could you please go through patches 1/3 and 2/3 and if deemed OK, give > > your acks. I sent the original patch in beginning of February (~4 months > > back) and resent the patches again in beginning of April due to lack of > > traffic. Paul Moore was kind enough to ack twice - the 3/3 and its > > resend patch. However these 2 patches still remain. I'd really > > appreciate if someone reviewed them. > > I asked on April 3 which upstream tree you expect this patchset to go > through and I did not see a reply. Do you have a specific target or is > the large addressee list assuming someone else is taking this set? All > we have seen is that it is not intended to go through the audit tree. > Apologies for it. As Paul Moore replied, initially I assumed this patchset to not go through the audit tree as the audit specific changes were secondary to the main change (though certainly I did not think which upstream tree the patchset would go through). But now I am okay with the patchset making it to upstream via audit tree if it is fine by the maintainers. Thanks Amol > > Thanks > > Amol > > - RGB > > -- > Richard Guy Briggs > Sr. S/W Engineer, Kernel Security, Base Operating Systems > Remote, Ottawa, Red Hat Canada > IRC: rgb, SunRaycer > Voice: +1.647.777.2635, Internal: (81) 32635 > -- Linux-audit mailing list Linux-audit@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-audit