From: Manfred Spraul <manfred@colorfullife.com>
To: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC, PATCH] fix SEM_UNDO with namespaces
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 18:14:47 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <47F10DF7.5010702@colorfullife.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <47F08ED6.1090103@openvz.org>
Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
> Manfred Spraul wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> the attached patch should fix the combination of CLONE_NEWIPC with
>> shared sysv undo structures (the common case, just
>> sys_unshare(CLONE_NEWIPC)):
>> lookup_undo() now locates the undo array based on both semid and the
>> namespace pointer.
>>
>
> If you start using any IPC object and then call unshare with CLONE_NEWIPC,
> then it's your problem, but not the kernel.
>
The result is a kernel memory corruption, and kernel memory corruptions
are always the kernel's problem.
The code assumed that a semaphore id is globally unique. With
namespaces, this is not true anymore.
If two semaphore arrays exist with the same id, but different sizes,
then semops will cause memory corruptions: The undo structure contains
one element for each semaphore, thus the semop will write behind the end
of the memory allocation.
> I agree, that we should probably destroy this one when the task calls
> unshare, but trying to keep this list relevant is useless.
>
A very tricky question: Let's assume we have a process with two threads.
The undo structure is shared, as per opengroup standard.
Now one thread calls unshare(CLONE_NEWIPC). What should happen? We
cannot destroy the undo structure, the other thread might be still
interested in it.
If we allow sys_unshare() for multithreaded processes with CLONE_NEWIPC
and without CLONE_SYSVSEM, then we must handle this case.
--
Manfred
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-03-31 16:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-03-30 20:50 [RFC, PATCH] fix SEM_UNDO with namespaces Manfred Spraul
2008-03-31 7:12 ` Pavel Emelyanov
2008-03-31 16:14 ` Manfred Spraul [this message]
2008-04-01 9:44 ` Pavel Emelyanov
2008-04-01 14:15 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2008-04-03 19:04 ` Andrew Morton
2008-04-03 19:31 ` Manfred Spraul
2008-04-01 15:25 ` Eric W. Biederman
2008-04-03 19:40 ` Manfred Spraul
2008-04-03 19:44 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2008-04-04 4:39 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2008-04-06 15:11 ` Manfred Spraul
2008-04-06 16:26 ` [PATCH] fix SEM_UNDO with namespaces, take 2 Manfred Spraul
2008-04-07 7:21 ` Pavel Emelyanov
2008-04-07 17:03 ` Manfred Spraul
2008-04-08 8:09 ` Pavel Emelyanov
2008-04-14 21:10 ` [RFC, PATCH] fix SEM_UNDO with namespaces 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=47F10DF7.5010702@colorfullife.com \
--to=manfred@colorfullife.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=xemul@openvz.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.