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=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED 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 DC6A1C433E0 for ; Tue, 26 May 2020 12:40:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-2.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 8ABB82065C for ; Tue, 26 May 2020 12:40:14 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="bHu8IUKn" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 8ABB82065C Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=paul-moore.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=1590496813; 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=fCzgsHphaowJMh+ZGNgLbinsdiBfhh54VDkQxU/jZLA=; b=bHu8IUKnN+o1XRphkuqXDuS9dBgPQlgfVFYAqoUdKl5XHToeV9xrCiu2zWfA8CQ5TIhCm5 PIzMVLGfAXZpVYbctvzpZ0hdWpT7crHxGH9L1UxaxcZAQ+XlqtV5xMiXDomR9kXaHg8LG/ 3poWTO0WPSLLfn7CpUBw16n2bt9JMYQ= 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-270-osaOv1ZCNli814xxJtXofw-1; Tue, 26 May 2020 08:40:09 -0400 X-MC-Unique: osaOv1ZCNli814xxJtXofw-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A67AC8064C9; Tue, 26 May 2020 12:40:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from colo-mx.corp.redhat.com (colo-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.20]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 824985C1D6; Tue, 26 May 2020 12:40:05 +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 DD7551809547; Tue, 26 May 2020 12:40:04 +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 04QCYr9C008394 for ; Tue, 26 May 2020 08:34:53 -0400 Received: by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) id 8AB2E9D72; Tue, 26 May 2020 12:34:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast04.extmail.prod.ext.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.55.20]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 867649D63 for ; Tue, 26 May 2020 12:34:49 +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 9880F101A525 for ; Tue, 26 May 2020 12:34:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ed1-f68.google.com (mail-ed1-f68.google.com [209.85.208.68]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-65-A1gAMlcDPK2WXKCWJE_ElA-1; Tue, 26 May 2020 08:34:45 -0400 X-MC-Unique: A1gAMlcDPK2WXKCWJE_ElA-1 Received: by mail-ed1-f68.google.com with SMTP id s19so17471248edt.12 for ; Tue, 26 May 2020 05:34:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=JUFqBLf1RiIPnvjRp2NeVt7jf0hFenXjeR9kjT+Rdf0=; b=fG+gehm5ONGe48hICbrHttEhbhdWITQD7aoXWIeJL/vvPvs9UHrnjD09aJOttMkS0s sQJk0KFycYBjqklAjqg/BbJK24eQW102SQfek2R45fvXl5pO6oGOYviinfAOsQv7H/uv eVoTUz5m1/DdWUxc6BJnltpV8nbvhrK6SbrIL6RCOOjv8OfQaDw/8p5qHy4rEk6YpkOq 23orZe/r1PBD6gPvJHjyEV4DD+hWLSAOSKhw5ArYICIhT+y8kiVCM7veDCiifBmaD5Zc cb0ATzicS46itc54yo2yG93CWcJzAAOpDz/6luuVzE7Mbh5CXNW6mUhkScXfzCn0Crer nbaQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532zqn7KJRMOxmanSJPXyWZfstxUUy8SGhIpw/28egHOmJpngqyR RQkHvKKJh2RJveVFuDgFqaZ/7IzBvHFEj3n3ElN3w8w= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwVhTK/f1+ttt/wIH/DF4otAgZkYmCBshCaTHZu+pV434ay6yyTjaqEoYxYdPBJpQQXAqjcQZ1DMw1Wtx1TaHg= X-Received: by 2002:aa7:cf17:: with SMTP id a23mr16099251edy.128.1590496483906; Tue, 26 May 2020 05:34:43 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200402055640.6677-1-frextrite@gmail.com> <20200524081117.GA29@workstation-LAP.localdomain> <20200525131741.s6lgb263fpo5uszk@madcap2.tricolour.ca> <20200525180421.GA19@workstation-LAP.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <20200525180421.GA19@workstation-LAP.localdomain> From: Paul Moore Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 08:34:33 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3 RESEND] sched: Remove __rcu annotation from cred pointer To: Amol Grover X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.11.54.5 X-loop: linux-audit@redhat.com X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 26 May 2020 08:40:03 -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 , Richard Guy Briggs , 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 10.5.11.16 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 2:04 PM Amol Grover wrote: > 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. This patchset is not appropriate for the audit tree as the most significant changes are not audit related. My ACK on patch 3/3 was, and is, conditional on the previous patches being acceptable to the greater kernel community; this is the main reason why I didn't ACK patch 1/3 or 2/3. -- paul moore www.paul-moore.com -- Linux-audit mailing list Linux-audit@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-audit