From: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@us.ibm.com>
To: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Cc: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@gmail.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Eric Sesterhenn <snakebyte@gmx.de>,
containers@lists.osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Dhaval Giani <dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: Re: namespaces?: bug at mm/slub.c:2750
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 13:38:46 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090211193846.GB1344@us.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2532.1234375381@redhat.com>
Quoting David Howells (dhowells@redhat.com):
> Serge E. Hallyn <serue@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > It's called under uidhash_lock spinlock so should be ok, but in
> > principle you're right so it's probably a good idea.
>
> The lock is nothing to do with it. put_user_ns() may call kfree() on the
> user_namespace, but the user_struct given to uid_hash_remove() may still be
> attached to it.
Yes, but noone will pull the user_struct off the list without
taking the lock.
what am I missing?
Anyway, I do like swapping the lines (as below) better.
-serge
From 8b83d11023c1064e99bffae3c2a05580b915de60 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Serge E. Hallyn <serue@us.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 11:29:52 -0500
Subject: [PATCH 1/1] user namespaces: only put the userns when we unhash the uid
uids in namespaces other than init don't get a sysfs entry.
For those in the init namespace, while we're waiting to remove
the sysfs entry for the uid the uid is still hashed, and
alloc_uid() may re-grab that uid without getting a new
reference to the user_ns, which we've already put in free_user
before scheduling remove_user_sysfs_dir().
Signed-off-by: Serge E. Hallyn <serue@us.ibm.com>
---
kernel/user.c | 3 +--
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/user.c b/kernel/user.c
index 477b666..3551ac7 100644
--- a/kernel/user.c
+++ b/kernel/user.c
@@ -72,6 +72,7 @@ static void uid_hash_insert(struct user_struct *up, struct hlist_head *hashent)
static void uid_hash_remove(struct user_struct *up)
{
hlist_del_init(&up->uidhash_node);
+ put_user_ns(up->user_ns);
}
static struct user_struct *uid_hash_find(uid_t uid, struct hlist_head *hashent)
@@ -334,7 +335,6 @@ static void free_user(struct user_struct *up, unsigned long flags)
atomic_inc(&up->__count);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&uidhash_lock, flags);
- put_user_ns(up->user_ns);
INIT_WORK(&up->work, remove_user_sysfs_dir);
schedule_work(&up->work);
}
@@ -357,7 +357,6 @@ static void free_user(struct user_struct *up, unsigned long flags)
sched_destroy_user(up);
key_put(up->uid_keyring);
key_put(up->session_keyring);
- put_user_ns(up->user_ns);
kmem_cache_free(uid_cachep, up);
}
--
1.6.1
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@us.ibm.com>
To: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Cc: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@gmail.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Eric Sesterhenn <snakebyte@gmx.de>,
containers@lists.osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Dhaval Giani <dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: Re: namespaces?: bug at mm/slub.c:2750
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 13:38:46 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090211193846.GB1344@us.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2532.1234375381@redhat.com>
Quoting David Howells (dhowells@redhat.com):
> Serge E. Hallyn <serue@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > It's called under uidhash_lock spinlock so should be ok, but in
> > principle you're right so it's probably a good idea.
>
> The lock is nothing to do with it. put_user_ns() may call kfree() on the
> user_namespace, but the user_struct given to uid_hash_remove() may still be
> attached to it.
Yes, but noone will pull the user_struct off the list without
taking the lock.
what am I missing?
Anyway, I do like swapping the lines (as below) better.
-serge
>From 8b83d11023c1064e99bffae3c2a05580b915de60 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Serge E. Hallyn <serue@us.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 11:29:52 -0500
Subject: [PATCH 1/1] user namespaces: only put the userns when we unhash the uid
uids in namespaces other than init don't get a sysfs entry.
For those in the init namespace, while we're waiting to remove
the sysfs entry for the uid the uid is still hashed, and
alloc_uid() may re-grab that uid without getting a new
reference to the user_ns, which we've already put in free_user
before scheduling remove_user_sysfs_dir().
Signed-off-by: Serge E. Hallyn <serue@us.ibm.com>
---
kernel/user.c | 3 +--
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/user.c b/kernel/user.c
index 477b666..3551ac7 100644
--- a/kernel/user.c
+++ b/kernel/user.c
@@ -72,6 +72,7 @@ static void uid_hash_insert(struct user_struct *up, struct hlist_head *hashent)
static void uid_hash_remove(struct user_struct *up)
{
hlist_del_init(&up->uidhash_node);
+ put_user_ns(up->user_ns);
}
static struct user_struct *uid_hash_find(uid_t uid, struct hlist_head *hashent)
@@ -334,7 +335,6 @@ static void free_user(struct user_struct *up, unsigned long flags)
atomic_inc(&up->__count);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&uidhash_lock, flags);
- put_user_ns(up->user_ns);
INIT_WORK(&up->work, remove_user_sysfs_dir);
schedule_work(&up->work);
}
@@ -357,7 +357,6 @@ static void free_user(struct user_struct *up, unsigned long flags)
sched_destroy_user(up);
key_put(up->uid_keyring);
key_put(up->session_keyring);
- put_user_ns(up->user_ns);
kmem_cache_free(uid_cachep, up);
}
--
1.6.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-02-11 19:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-02-06 11:35 namespaces?: bug at mm/slub.c:2750 Eric Sesterhenn
2009-02-07 0:15 ` Andrew Morton
2009-02-09 11:53 ` Eric Sesterhenn
2009-02-11 7:55 ` Vegard Nossum
[not found] ` <19f34abd0902102355o5bf51096o9aa3737e87104fb9-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2009-02-11 8:07 ` Andrew Morton
2009-02-11 8:07 ` Andrew Morton
2009-02-11 10:48 ` Vegard Nossum
2009-02-11 16:37 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2009-02-11 16:37 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2009-02-11 17:02 ` David Howells
[not found] ` <1538.1234371764-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2009-02-11 17:24 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2009-02-11 17:24 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2009-02-11 18:00 ` Vegard Nossum
2009-02-11 18:03 ` David Howells
2009-02-11 19:38 ` Serge E. Hallyn [this message]
2009-02-11 19:38 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2009-02-11 20:42 ` David Howells
2009-02-11 21:21 ` Serge E. Hallyn
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=20090211193846.GB1344@us.ibm.com \
--to=serue@us.ibm.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=containers@lists.osdl.org \
--cc=dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=snakebyte@gmx.de \
--cc=vegard.nossum@gmail.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.