From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>,
viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, berrange@redhat.com,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/3] exec: Move unshare_files down to avoid locks being dropped on exec.
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2018 17:49:38 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180917154938.GC25173@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <874leps5n9.fsf_-_@xmission.com>
On 09/16, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> @@ -1291,6 +1292,12 @@ int flush_old_exec(struct linux_binprm * bprm)
> flush_thread();
> current->personality &= ~bprm->per_clear;
>
> + retval = unshare_files(&displaced);
I was going to sugget basically the same changes, please feel free to add
my reviewed-by to 1-3.
Just for record. If we should really worry about unshare_files() failure
after de_thread() (imo we shouldn't), we can do another change:
__do_execve_file:
unshare_fd(CLONE_FILES, &bprm->unshared_copy);
...
flush_old_exec:
de_thread();
if (bprm->unshared_copy) {
// now that we killed sub-threads recheck
if (current->files->count > 1) {
put_files_struct(current->files);
current->files = bprm->unshared_copy;
} else {
put_files_struct(bprm->unshared_copy);
}
}
but again, I think your series is fine.
Oleg.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-09-17 15:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-09-14 10:53 [PATCH v3 0/3] exec: fix passing of file locks across execve in multithreaded processes Jeff Layton
2018-09-14 10:53 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] exec: separate thread_count for files_struct Jeff Layton
2018-09-15 16:04 ` Oleg Nesterov
2018-09-16 16:10 ` Eric W. Biederman
2018-09-17 15:24 ` Oleg Nesterov
2018-09-17 20:45 ` Eric W. Biederman
2018-09-14 10:53 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] exec: delay clone(CLONE_FILES) if task associated with current files_struct is exec'ing Jeff Layton
2018-09-14 10:53 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] exec: do unshare_files after de_thread Jeff Layton
2018-09-15 16:37 ` Oleg Nesterov
2018-09-16 16:49 ` Eric W. Biederman
2018-09-17 15:28 ` Oleg Nesterov
2018-09-16 16:59 ` Eric W. Biederman
2018-09-16 17:38 ` [RFC][PATCH 0/3] exec: Moving unshare_files_struct Eric W. Biederman
2018-09-16 17:39 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/3] exec: Move unshare_files down to avoid locks being dropped on exec Eric W. Biederman
2018-09-17 15:49 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2018-09-16 17:40 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/3] exec: Simplify unshare_files Eric W. Biederman
2018-09-17 16:23 ` Oleg Nesterov
2018-09-17 20:26 ` Eric W. Biederman
2018-09-16 17:41 ` [RFC][PATCH 3/3] exec: Remove reset_files_struct Eric W. Biederman
2018-09-17 15:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 0/3] exec: Moving unshare_files_struct Oleg Nesterov
2018-09-18 22:18 ` Eric W. Biederman
2018-09-17 16:24 ` Jeff Layton
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=20180917154938.GC25173@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=berrange@redhat.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=jlayton@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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.