From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
Cc: matthew@wil.cx, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: DoS with POSIX file locks?
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 14:30:41 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1142861441.3114.45.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E1FLKMl-0008Gh-00@dorka.pomaz.szeredi.hu>
On Mon, 2006-03-20 at 14:24 +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > > > Right. Um. I took it out back in March 2003 after enough people
> > > > convinced me it wasn't worth trying to account for all the memory
> > > > processes use, and the userbeans project would take care of it anyway.
> > > > Haha.
> > > >
> > > > It's hard to fix the accounting. You have to deal with one thread
> > > > allocating the lock, and then a different thread freeing it. We never
> > > > actually accounted for posix locks (which are the ones we really needed
> > > > to!) and on occasion had current->locks go negative, with all kinds of
> > > > associated badness.
> > >
> > > Things look fairly straightforward if the accounting is done in
> > > files_struct instead of task_struct.
> >
> > that's the wrong place; you can send fd's over unix sockets to other
> > processes....
>
> POSIX locks have no association with fd's. Only the inode and the
> "owner" is relevant
but the point is that with unix sockets you can send inodes to other
processes.. who don't share files_struct
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-03-20 13:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-03-20 11:41 DoS with POSIX file locks? Miklos Szeredi
2006-03-20 12:11 ` Matthew Wilcox
2006-03-20 12:19 ` Miklos Szeredi
2006-03-20 12:39 ` Matthew Wilcox
2006-03-20 12:52 ` Miklos Szeredi
2006-03-20 13:13 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-03-20 13:24 ` Miklos Szeredi
2006-03-20 13:30 ` Arjan van de Ven [this message]
2006-03-20 13:39 ` Miklos Szeredi
2006-03-20 15:32 ` Matthew Wilcox
2006-03-20 16:41 ` Miklos Szeredi
2006-03-20 20:35 ` J. Bruce Fields
2006-03-21 6:38 ` Miklos Szeredi
2006-03-20 18:22 ` Trond Myklebust
2006-03-21 9:44 ` Miklos Szeredi
2006-03-21 17:28 ` Trond Myklebust
2006-03-21 17:58 ` Miklos Szeredi
2006-03-21 18:16 ` Trond Myklebust
2006-03-21 19:16 ` Chris Wright
2006-03-22 6:21 ` Miklos Szeredi
2006-03-22 11:12 ` Trond Myklebust
2006-03-22 12:16 ` Miklos Szeredi
2006-03-22 15:56 ` Trond Myklebust
2006-03-22 16:34 ` Miklos Szeredi
2006-03-22 20:07 ` Trond Myklebust
2006-03-22 20:19 ` Miklos Szeredi
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=1142861441.3114.45.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org \
--to=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matthew@wil.cx \
--cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
/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).