From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@openwall.com>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org,
Serge Hallyn <serge.hallyn@canonical.com>,
daniel.lezcano@free.fr, ebiederm@xmission.com, mingo@elte.hu,
rdunlap@xenotime.net, tj@kernel.org,
kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com
Subject: [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH] shm: handle separate PID namespaces case
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2011 17:05:13 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110704150513.GA6893@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110704115523.GA11252@albatros>
On 07/04, Vasiliy Kulikov wrote:
>
> @@ -239,7 +239,23 @@ static int shm_try_destroy_current(int id, void *p, void *data)
> if (IS_ERR(shp))
> return 0;
>
> - if (shp->shm_cprid != task_tgid_vnr(current)) {
> + if (shp->shm_creator != current) {
> + shm_unlock(shp);
> + return 0;
I know absolutely nothing about ipc/, so probably I am wrong. But do
we really need shm_lock() (which also another idr_find) to check
->shm_creator ? This is calles by idr_for_each() and afaics "void *p"
should match, no?
IOW, can't shm_try_destroy_current() do something like
struct shmid_kernel *shp = container_of(p, shmid_kernel, shm_perm);
if (shp->shm_creator != current)
return;
shm_lock();
...
?
Just curious.
Oleg.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-07-04 15:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-06-29 22:14 + ipc-introduce-shm_rmid_forced-sysctl.patch added to -mm tree akpm
[not found] ` <20110630134855.GA6165@mail.hallyn.com>
2011-06-30 13:57 ` [kernel-hardening] " Vasiliy Kulikov
2011-07-03 18:00 ` Vasiliy Kulikov
2011-07-04 11:55 ` [kernel-hardening] [PATCH] shm: handle separate PID namespaces case Vasiliy Kulikov
2011-07-04 15:05 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2011-07-04 15:26 ` [kernel-hardening] " Vasiliy Kulikov
2011-07-04 15:37 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-07-04 15:48 ` Vasiliy Kulikov
2011-07-04 17:01 ` [kernel-hardening] [PATCH] shm: optimize locking and ipc_namespace getting Vasiliy Kulikov
2011-07-04 17:29 ` [kernel-hardening] " Oleg Nesterov
2011-07-04 17:51 ` Vasiliy Kulikov
2011-07-05 17:38 ` [kernel-hardening] [PATCH v2] " Vasiliy Kulikov
2011-07-05 17:37 ` [kernel-hardening] [PATCH v2] shm: handle separate PID namespaces case Vasiliy Kulikov
2011-07-15 6:45 ` [kernel-hardening] " Vasiliy Kulikov
2011-07-05 14:26 ` [kernel-hardening] Re: [PATCH] " Serge Hallyn
2011-07-05 14:50 ` Vasiliy Kulikov
2011-07-05 15:57 ` Serge Hallyn
2011-07-05 17:42 ` Vasiliy Kulikov
2011-07-06 16:31 ` Serge Hallyn
2011-07-06 16:57 ` Vasiliy Kulikov
2011-07-06 18:08 ` Oleg Nesterov
2011-07-06 18:35 ` Vasiliy Kulikov
2011-07-05 17:29 ` Vasiliy Kulikov
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=20110704150513.GA6893@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=daniel.lezcano@free.fr \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=rdunlap@xenotime.net \
--cc=segoon@openwall.com \
--cc=serge.hallyn@canonical.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
/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.