From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Oleg Nesterov Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/7][v6] Protect cinit from blocked fatal signals Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 07:15:05 +0100 Message-ID: <20090111061505.GB9014@redhat.com> References: <20090107074558.GA27881@us.ibm.com> <20090107075214.GF27985@us.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090107075214.GF27985-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: containers-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org Errors-To: containers-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org To: Sukadev Bhattiprolu Cc: linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, bastian-yyjItF7Rl6lg9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org, ebiederm-aS9lmoZGLiVWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org, containers-qjLDD68F18O7TbgM5vRIOg@public.gmane.org, roland-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, xemul-GEFAQzZX7r8dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org List-Id: containers.vger.kernel.org On 01/06, Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote: > > --- a/kernel/signal.c > +++ b/kernel/signal.c > @@ -1890,9 +1890,16 @@ relock: > > /* > * Global init gets no signals it doesn't want. > + * Container-init gets no signals it doesn't want from same > + * container. > + * > + * Note that if global/container-init sees a sig_kernel_only() > + * signal here, the signal must have been generated internally > + * or must have come from an ancestor namespace. In either > + * case, the signal cannot be dropped. > */ > if (unlikely(signal->flags & SIGNAL_UNKILLABLE) && > - !signal_group_exit(signal)) > + !sig_kernel_only(signr)) Just for record. We still have small problem with fatal_signal_pending(cinit), we should add a similar change to complete_signal to ensure that the pending SIGKILL implies SIGNAL_GROUP_EXIT. But this needs another patch, and this series is imho fine. Oleg. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752169AbZAKGRS (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Jan 2009 01:17:18 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751045AbZAKGRJ (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Jan 2009 01:17:09 -0500 Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:35514 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751022AbZAKGRF (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Jan 2009 01:17:05 -0500 Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 07:15:05 +0100 From: Oleg Nesterov To: Sukadev Bhattiprolu Cc: ebiederm@xmission.com, roland@redhat.com, bastian@waldi.eu.org, containers@lists.osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xemul@openvz.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/7][v6] Protect cinit from blocked fatal signals Message-ID: <20090111061505.GB9014@redhat.com> References: <20090107074558.GA27881@us.ibm.com> <20090107075214.GF27985@us.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090107075214.GF27985@us.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 01/06, Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote: > > --- a/kernel/signal.c > +++ b/kernel/signal.c > @@ -1890,9 +1890,16 @@ relock: > > /* > * Global init gets no signals it doesn't want. > + * Container-init gets no signals it doesn't want from same > + * container. > + * > + * Note that if global/container-init sees a sig_kernel_only() > + * signal here, the signal must have been generated internally > + * or must have come from an ancestor namespace. In either > + * case, the signal cannot be dropped. > */ > if (unlikely(signal->flags & SIGNAL_UNKILLABLE) && > - !signal_group_exit(signal)) > + !sig_kernel_only(signr)) Just for record. We still have small problem with fatal_signal_pending(cinit), we should add a similar change to complete_signal to ensure that the pending SIGKILL implies SIGNAL_GROUP_EXIT. But this needs another patch, and this series is imho fine. Oleg.