From: sukadev-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg-6lXkIZvqkOAvJsYlp49lxw@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Containers <containers-qjLDD68F18O7TbgM5vRIOg@public.gmane.org>,
Pavel Emelianov <xemul-GEFAQzZX7r8dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Signal semantics for /sbin/init
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2007 20:04:53 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070927030453.GA24451@us.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070918190052.GA14030-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
Oleg,
Any thoughts on how to proceed with this patchset ? While not complete
with respect to blocked signals and container init, would this patchset
make semantics slightly better than they are today (container-init can
be terminated from within the container) ?
Suka
sukadev-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org [sukadev-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org] wrote:
| Oleg Nesterov [oleg-6lXkIZvqkOAvJsYlp49lxw@public.gmane.org] wrote:
| | On 09/13, sukadev-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org wrote:
| | >
| | > Oleg Nesterov [oleg-6lXkIZvqkOAvJsYlp49lxw@public.gmane.org] wrote:
| | > | > >
| | > | > >> Notes:
| | > | > >>
| | > | > >> - Blocked signals are never ignored, so init still can receive
| | > | > >> a pending blocked signal after sigprocmask(SIG_UNBLOCK).
| | > | > >> Easy to fix, but probably we can ignore this issue.
| | > | > >
| | > | > > I was wrong. This should be fixed right now. I _think_ this is easy,
| | > | > > and I was going to finish this patch yesterday, but - sorry! - I just
| | > | > > can't switch to "kernel mode" these days, I am fighting with some urgent
| | > | > > tasks on my paid job.
| | > | > >
| | > | > To respect the current init semantic,
| | > |
| | > | The current init semantic is broken in many ways ;)
| | > |
| | > | > shouldn't we discard any unblockable
| | > | > signal (STOP and KILL) sent by a process to its pid namespace init process ?
| | >
| | > Yes. And Patch 1/3 (Oleg's patch) in the set I sent, handles this already
| | > (since STOP and KILL are never in the task->blocked list)
| | >
| | >
| | > | > Then, all other signals should be handled appropriately by the pid namespace
| | > | > init.
| | >
| | > |
| | > | Yes, I think you are probably right, this should be enough in practice. After all,
| | > | only root can send the signal to /sbin/init.
| | >
| | > I agree - the assumption that the container-init will handle these
| | > other signals, simplifies the kernel implementation for now.
| | >
| | >
| | > | On my machine, /proc/1/status shows that init doesn't have a handler for
| | > | non-ignored SIGUNUSED == 31, though.
| | > |
| | > | But who knows? The kernel promises some guarantees, it is not good to break them.
| | > | Perhaps some strange non-standard environment may suffer.
| | > |
| | > | > We are assuming that the pid namespace init is not doing anything silly and
| | > | > I guess it's OK if the consequences are only on the its pid namespace and
| | > | > not the whole system.
| | > |
| | > | The sub-namespace case is very easy afaics, we only need the "signal comes from
| | > | the parent namespace" check, not a problem if we make the decision on the sender's
| | > | path, like this patch does.
| | >
| | > Yes, patches 2 and 3 of the set already do the ancestor-ns check. no ?
| |
| | Yes, I think patches 2-3 are good. But this patch is not. I thought that we
| | can ignore the "Blocked signals are never ignored" problem, now I am not sure.
| | It is possible that init temporary blocks a signal which it is not going to
| | handle.
| |
| | Perhaps we can do something like the patch below, but I don't like it. With
| | this patch, we check the signal handler even if /sbin/init blocks the signal.
| | This makes the semantics a bit strange for /sbin/init. Hopefully not a problem
| | in practice, but still not good.
|
| I think this is one step ahead of what we were discussing last week.
| A container-init that does not have a handler for a fatal signal would
| survive even if the signal is posted when it is blocked.
|
| |
| | Unfortunately, I don't know how to make it better. The problem with blocked
| | signals is that we don't know who is the sender of the signal at the time
| | when the signal is unblocked.
|
| One solution I was thinking of was to possibly queue pending blocked
| signals to a container init seperately and then requeue them on the
| normal queue when signals are unblocked. Its definitely not an easier
| solution, but might be less intrusive than the "signal from parent ns
| flag" solution.
|
| i.e suppose we have:
|
| struct pid_namespace {
| ...
| struct sigpending cinit_blocked_pending;
| struct sigpending cinit_blocked_shared_pending;
| }
|
| Signals from ancestor ns are queued as usual on task->pending and
| task->signal->shared_pending. They don't need any special handling.
|
| Only signals posted to a container-init from within its namespace
| need special handling (as in: ignore unhandled fatal signals from
| same namespace).
|
| If the container-init has say SIGUSR1 blocked, and a descendant of
| container-init posts SIGUSR1 to container-init, queue the SIGUSR1
| in pid_namespace->cinit_blocked_pending.
|
| When container-init unblocks SIGUSR1, check if there was a pending
| SIGUSR1 from same namespace (i.e check ->cinit_blocked_pending list).
| If there was and container-init has a handler for SIGUSR1, post SIGUSR1
| on task->pending queue and let the container-init handle SIGUSR1.
|
| If there was a SIGUSR1 posted to containier init and there is no handler
| for SIGUSR1, then just ignore the SIGUSR1 (since it would be fatal
| otherwise).
|
| I chose 'struct pid_namespace' for the temporary queue, since we need
| the temporary queues only for container-inits (not for all processes).
| And having it allocated ahead of time, ensures we can queue the signal
| even under low-memory conditions.
|
| Just an idea at this point.
|
| |
| | What do you think? Can we live with this oddity? Otherwise, we have to add
| | something like the "the signal is from the parent namespace" flag, and I bet
| | this is not trivial to implement correctly.
|
| I think its reasonable to place some restrictions on container-init
| processes, so, yes, I think the oddity is fine for now (i.e at least
| until someone needs a different behavior).
|
| BTW, I ran some tests on this patch and they seem to work as expected :-)
| Will run some more tests today.
|
| |
| | Oleg.
| |
| | --- t/kernel/signal.c~IINITSIGS 2007-08-28 19:15:28.000000000 +0400
| | +++ t/kernel/signal.c 2007-09-17 19:20:24.000000000 +0400
| | @@ -39,11 +39,35 @@
| |
| | static struct kmem_cache *sigqueue_cachep;
| |
| | +static int sig_init_ignore(struct task_struct *tsk)
| | +{
| | + // Currently this check is a bit racy with exec(),
| | + // we can _simplify_ de_thread and close the race.
| | + if (likely(!is_init(tsk->group_leader)))
| | + return 0;
| |
| | -static int sig_ignored(struct task_struct *t, int sig)
| | + // ---------------- Multiple pid namespaces ----------------
| | + // if (current is from tsk's parent pid_ns && !in_interrupt())
| | + // return 0;
| | +
| | + return 1;
| | +}
| | +
| | +static int sig_task_ignore(struct task_struct *tsk, int sig)
| | {
| | - void __user * handler;
| | + void __user * handler = tsk->sighand->action[sig-1].sa.sa_handler;
| | +
| | + if (handler == SIG_IGN)
| | + return 1;
| | +
| | + if (handler != SIG_DFL)
| | + return 0;
| |
| | + return sig_kernel_ignore(sig) || sig_init_ignore(tsk);
| | +}
| | +
| | +static int sig_ignored(struct task_struct *t, int sig)
| | +{
| | /*
| | * Tracers always want to know about signals..
| | */
| | @@ -55,13 +79,10 @@ static int sig_ignored(struct task_struc
| | * signal handler may change by the time it is
| | * unblocked.
| | */
| | - if (sigismember(&t->blocked, sig))
| | + if (sigismember(&t->blocked, sig) && !sig_init_ignore(t))
| | return 0;
| |
| | - /* Is it explicitly or implicitly ignored? */
| | - handler = t->sighand->action[sig-1].sa.sa_handler;
| | - return handler == SIG_IGN ||
| | - (handler == SIG_DFL && sig_kernel_ignore(sig));
| | + return sig_task_ignore(t, sig);
| | }
| |
| | /*
| | @@ -554,6 +575,9 @@ static void handle_stop_signal(int sig,
| | */
| | return;
| |
| | + if (sig_init_ignore(p))
| | + return;
| | +
| | if (sig_kernel_stop(sig)) {
| | /*
| | * This is a stop signal. Remove SIGCONT from all queues.
| | @@ -1822,14 +1846,6 @@ relock:
| | if (sig_kernel_ignore(signr)) /* Default is nothing. */
| | continue;
| |
| | - /*
| | - * Init of a pid space gets no signals it doesn't want from
| | - * within that pid space. It can of course get signals from
| | - * its parent pid space.
| | - */
| | - if (current == child_reaper(current))
| | - continue;
| | -
| | if (sig_kernel_stop(signr)) {
| | if (current->signal->flags & SIGNAL_GROUP_EXIT)
| | continue;
| | @@ -2308,8 +2324,7 @@ int do_sigaction(int sig, struct k_sigac
| | * (for example, SIGCHLD), shall cause the pending signal to
| | * be discarded, whether or not it is blocked"
| | */
| | - if (act->sa.sa_handler == SIG_IGN ||
| | - (act->sa.sa_handler == SIG_DFL && sig_kernel_ignore(sig))) {
| | + if (sig_task_ignore(current, sig)) {
| | struct task_struct *t = current;
| | sigemptyset(&mask);
| | sigaddset(&mask, sig);
| _______________________________________________
| Containers mailing list
| Containers-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org
| https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-09-27 3:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-09-11 4:10 [PATCH 1/3] Signal semantics for /sbin/init sukadev-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA
[not found] ` <20070911041030.GA1264-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2007-09-11 11:19 ` Oleg Nesterov
[not found] ` <20070911111928.GA123-6lXkIZvqkOAvJsYlp49lxw@public.gmane.org>
2007-09-13 15:40 ` Cedric Le Goater
[not found] ` <46E959EB.2070207-NmTC/0ZBporQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2007-09-13 16:58 ` Oleg Nesterov
[not found] ` <20070913165820.GA3465-6lXkIZvqkOAvJsYlp49lxw@public.gmane.org>
2007-09-14 3:00 ` sukadev-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA
[not found] ` <20070914030053.GA21242-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2007-09-17 15:21 ` Oleg Nesterov
[not found] ` <20070917152122.GA861-6lXkIZvqkOAvJsYlp49lxw@public.gmane.org>
2007-09-18 19:00 ` sukadev-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA
[not found] ` <20070918190052.GA14030-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2007-09-27 3:04 ` sukadev-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA [this message]
[not found] ` <20070927030453.GA24451-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2007-09-28 10:38 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-10-01 17:00 ` Serge E. Hallyn
[not found] ` <20071001170035.GA10939-6s5zFf/epYLPQpwDFJZrxKsjOiXwFzmk@public.gmane.org>
2007-10-01 17:47 ` sukadev-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA
[not found] ` <20071001174720.GB28100-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2007-10-01 18:08 ` Serge E. Hallyn
[not found] ` <20071001180849.GA21343-6s5zFf/epYLPQpwDFJZrxKsjOiXwFzmk@public.gmane.org>
2007-10-05 4:30 ` sukadev-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA
[not found] ` <20071005043030.GA27787-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2007-10-08 14:36 ` Serge E. Hallyn
[not found] ` <20071008143649.GA23774-6s5zFf/epYLPQpwDFJZrxKsjOiXwFzmk@public.gmane.org>
2007-10-08 15:42 ` sukadev-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA
2007-09-14 10:16 ` [Devel] " Daniel Pittman
[not found] ` <87myvpo8le.fsf-kiwxAyAbAnkGAYDEi5AF0l6hYfS7NtTn@public.gmane.org>
2007-09-17 15:24 ` Oleg Nesterov
[not found] ` <20070917152411.GB861-6lXkIZvqkOAvJsYlp49lxw@public.gmane.org>
2007-09-17 23:20 ` Daniel Pittman
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-08-31 20:29 sukadev-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA
[not found] ` <20070831202949.GA3268-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2007-09-01 11:02 ` Oleg Nesterov
[not found] ` <20070901110221.GC191-6lXkIZvqkOAvJsYlp49lxw@public.gmane.org>
2007-09-03 15:56 ` sukadev-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA
[not found] ` <20070903155609.GA2793-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2007-09-03 16:45 ` Oleg Nesterov
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=20070927030453.GA24451@us.ibm.com \
--to=sukadev-r/jw6+rmf7hqt0dzr+alfa@public.gmane.org \
--cc=containers-qjLDD68F18O7TbgM5vRIOg@public.gmane.org \
--cc=oleg-6lXkIZvqkOAvJsYlp49lxw@public.gmane.org \
--cc=xemul-GEFAQzZX7r8dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox