public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
To: Solar Designer <solar@openwall.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] set*uid() must not fail-and-return on OOM/rlimits
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 10:26:02 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060820082602.GB602@1wt.eu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060820003840.GA17249@openwall.com>

On Sun, Aug 20, 2006 at 04:38:40AM +0400, Solar Designer wrote:
> Willy and all,
> 
> Attached is a trivial patch (extracted from 2.4.33-ow1) that makes
> set*uid() kill the current process rather than proceed with -EAGAIN when
> the kernel is running out of memory.  Apparently, alloc_uid() can't fail
> and return anyway due to properties of the allocator, in which case the
> patch does not change a thing.  But better safe than sorry.

Whether it can fail or not, alloc_uid()'s author intent was to report its
problems via NULL :

                new = kmem_cache_alloc(uid_cachep, SLAB_KERNEL);
                if (!new)
                        return NULL;

So your change to set_user() are consistent with this design choice.
Now, chosing to kill the process whe the kernel runs out of memory
seems consistent with what will happen a few milliseconds later to
other processes anyway.

I'm just wondering why you return a SIGSEGV. When the kernel kills
tasks on OOM conditions, it sends either SIGTERM or SIGKILL, as we
can see here in mm/oom_kill.c:__oom_kill_task() :

        p->flags |= PF_MEMALLOC | PF_MEMDIE;
        /* This process has hardware access, be more careful. */
        if (cap_t(p->cap_effective) & CAP_TO_MASK(CAP_SYS_RAWIO)) {
                force_sig(SIGTERM, p);
        } else {
                force_sig(SIGKILL, p);
        }

Shouldn't we simply re-use the same code ? (not the function, I would not
like to get OOM messages outside the OOM killer).

> As you're probably aware, 2.6 kernels are affected to a greater extent,
> where set*uid() may also fail on trying to exceed RLIMIT_NPROC.  That
> needs to be fixed, too.

I've followed the thread a little bit but am not aware of all the details.

> Opinions are welcome.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Alexander

What do you (and others) think about this ?
Willy


> diff -urpPX nopatch linux-2.4.33/kernel/sys.c linux/kernel/sys.c
> --- linux-2.4.33/kernel/sys.c	Fri Nov 28 21:26:21 2003
> +++ linux/kernel/sys.c	Wed Aug 16 05:19:21 2006
> @@ -514,8 +514,10 @@ static int set_user(uid_t new_ruid, int 
>  	struct user_struct *new_user;
>  
>  	new_user = alloc_uid(new_ruid);
> -	if (!new_user)
> +	if (!new_user) {
> +		force_sig(SIGSEGV, current);
>  		return -EAGAIN;
> +	}
>  	switch_uid(new_user);
>  
>  	if(dumpclear)


  parent reply	other threads:[~2006-08-20  8:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-08-20  0:38 [PATCH] set*uid() must not fail-and-return on OOM/rlimits Solar Designer
2006-08-20  7:52 ` Kari Hurtta
2006-08-20 18:10   ` Alan Cox
2006-08-21  5:05     ` Kari Hurtta
2006-08-20  8:26 ` Willy Tarreau [this message]
2006-08-20 15:25   ` Solar Designer
2006-08-20 10:07 ` Alex Riesen
2006-08-20 15:30   ` Solar Designer
2006-08-20 15:53     ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-08-20 16:17       ` Willy Tarreau
2006-08-20 16:28       ` Ulrich Drepper
2006-08-20 16:45         ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-08-20 16:47         ` Michael Buesch
2006-08-20 16:48         ` Solar Designer
2006-08-20 18:03     ` Alan Cox
2006-08-20 18:10       ` Willy Tarreau
2006-08-20 18:36         ` Alan Cox
2006-08-20 18:21           ` Willy Tarreau
2006-08-20 18:52             ` Alan Cox
2006-08-20 19:01               ` Willy Tarreau
2006-08-20 19:33                 ` Alan Cox
2006-08-20 19:17                   ` Willy Tarreau
2006-08-20 16:04 ` Florian Weimer
2006-08-20 16:25   ` Solar Designer
2006-08-20 18:14 ` Alan Cox
2006-08-20 22:12   ` Solar Designer
2006-08-20 22:51     ` Alan Cox
2006-08-20 22:58       ` Solar Designer
2006-08-20 23:00       ` Alan Cox
2006-08-21  0:23       ` Peter Williams
2006-08-21  0:45         ` Solar Designer

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=20060820082602.GB602@1wt.eu \
    --to=w@1wt.eu \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=solar@openwall.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox