From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@parallels.com>,
Ricky Zhou <rickyz@chromium.org>, Julien Tinnes <jln@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] unshare: Unsharing a thread does not require unsharing a vm
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2015 18:17:18 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150813161718.GA23114@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87vbcjyzac.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org>
On 08/13, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> writes:
>
> > Let me first say that CLONE_SIGHAND must die, I think ;) and perhaps
> > even sighand_struct... I am wondering if we can add something like
> >
> > if ((clone_flags & (CLONE_THREAD | CLONE_SIGHAND)) == CLONE_SIGHAND)
> > pr_info("You are crazy, please report this to lkml\n");
> >
> > into copy_process().
>
> The only way killing CLONE_SIGHAND would be viable would be with a
> config option. There are entire generations of linux where libpthreads
> used this before CLONE_THREAD was implemented. Now perhaps no one cares
> anymore, but there are a lot of historic binairies that used it, even to
> the point where I know of at least one user outside of glibc's pthread
> implementation.
Heh. so we still need to keep it. Thanks.
> Yes. A shared sighand_struct will have a shared ->mm. But a private
> sighand_struct with count == 1 may also have a shared ->mm.
Yes sure. This just means that we can check current_is_single_threaded()
if CLONE_SIGHAND | CLONE_VM, signal->count check can be avoided.
> > Oh, I do not think we should check sighand->count. This can lead to
> > the same problem we have with the current current->mm->mm_users check.
> >
> > Most probably today nobody increments sighand->count (I didn't even
> > try to verify). But this is possible, and I saw the code which did
> > this to pin ->sighand...
>
> I have verified that copy_sighand is the only place in the kernel where
> we increment sighand->count today.
OK,
> de_thread in fs/exec.c even seems to
> rely on that.
Not really. This is just optimization, de_thread() could change ->sighand
unconditionally.
> So while I agree with you that the sighand->count could suffer a similar
> fate as mm_users it does not.
Ignoring the out-of-tree code ;)
Nevermind, I won't really argue, this all is mostly cosmetic. And perhaps
this sighand->count check in check_unshare_flags() makes this code look
a bit better / more understandable.
Still. How about the trivial *-fix.patch for -mm which simply does
- if (unshare_flags & (CLONE_SIGHAND | CLONE_VM)) {
+ if (unshare_flags & CLONE_SIGHAND) {
if (atomic_read(¤t->sighand->count) > 1)
return -EINVAL;
}
again, this doesn't really matter. To this "| CLONE_VM" looks
very confusing to me.
Oleg.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-08-13 16:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-07-28 17:15 [PATCH] user_ns: use correct check for single-threadedness Kees Cook
2015-07-28 18:02 ` Rik van Riel
2015-07-28 18:17 ` Eric W. Biederman
2015-07-28 20:55 ` Ricky Zhou
2015-07-28 21:01 ` Kees Cook
2015-08-05 18:13 ` Eric W. Biederman
2015-08-05 19:40 ` Kees Cook
2015-07-28 21:35 ` Andrew Morton
2015-07-28 21:50 ` Kees Cook
2015-07-28 22:11 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2015-08-05 11:38 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-08-05 11:53 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2015-08-05 13:13 ` Ricky Zhou
2015-08-05 17:23 ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-08-05 18:00 ` Eric W. Biederman
2015-08-05 18:52 ` Eric W. Biederman
2015-08-06 13:06 ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-08-06 13:44 ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-08-12 1:17 ` Eric W. Biederman
2015-08-12 14:40 ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-08-12 15:11 ` Eric W. Biederman
2015-08-12 1:22 ` [PATCH 0/2] userns: Creation logic fixes Eric W. Biederman
2015-08-12 1:24 ` [PATCH 1/2] unshare: Unsharing a thread does not require unsharing a vm Eric W. Biederman
2015-08-12 17:48 ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-08-12 18:39 ` Eric W. Biederman
2015-08-13 12:55 ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-08-13 15:38 ` Eric W. Biederman
2015-08-13 16:17 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2015-08-13 16:27 ` Eric W. Biederman
2015-08-13 16:50 ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-08-14 17:59 ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-08-12 19:59 ` [PATCH v2] " Eric W. Biederman
2015-08-13 12:57 ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-08-13 16:01 ` Eric W. Biederman
2015-08-13 16:30 ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-08-13 16:39 ` Eric W. Biederman
2015-08-12 1:25 ` [PATCH 2/2] userns,pidns: Force thread group sharing, not signal handler sharing Eric W. Biederman
2015-08-12 17:24 ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-08-12 6:29 ` [PATCH 0/2] userns: Creation logic fixes Kees Cook
2015-08-06 14:35 ` [PATCH] user_ns: use correct check for single-threadedness Oleg Nesterov
2015-08-06 21:16 ` 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=20150813161718.GA23114@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=jln@google.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
--cc=kirill@shutemov.name \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rickyz@chromium.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=vdavydov@parallels.com \
/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).