Re: [RFC v10][PATCH 05/13] Dump memory address space

[Dave Hansen <dave-23VcF4HTsmIX0ybBhKVfKdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org>]

On Fri, 2008-11-28 at 10:53 +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> 
> > +static int cr_ctx_checkpoint(struct cr_ctx *ctx, pid_t pid)
> > +{
> > +     ctx->root_pid = pid;
> > +
> > +     /*
> > +      * assume checkpointer is in container's root vfs
> > +      * FIXME: this works for now, but will change with real containers
> > +      */
> > +     ctx->vfsroot = &current->fs->root;
> > +     path_get(ctx->vfsroot);
> 
> This is going to break as soon as you get another thread doing e.g. chroot(2)
> while you are in there.

Yeah, we do need at least a read_lock(&current->fs->lock) to keep people
from chroot()'ing underneath us.

> And it's a really, _really_ bad idea to take a
> pointer to shared object, increment refcount on the current *contents* of
> said object and assume that dropping refcount on the later contents of the
> same will balance out.

Absolutely.  I assume you mean get_fs_struct(current) instead of
path_get().

-- Dave

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html