Re: Signals to cinit

Oleg Nesterov
2008-11-12T13:53:03Z

On 11/10, sukadev@linux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
>
> Oleg Nesterov [oleg@redhat.com] wrote:
> | (lkml cced because containers list's archive is not useable)
>
> Hmm. what do you mean by not usable ? I see your email here:
> https://lists.linux-foundation.org/pipermail/containers/2008-November/014152.html

Yes, but I failed to find our previous discussions via google, and actually
I prefer to see them all on marc.info, so I can quickly find them...

> | > Or something. yes, sys_rt_sigqueueinfo() is problematic...
>
> Yes, if user-space sets si_pid to 0.
>
> Can we change sys_rt_sigqueueinfo() to:
>
> if (!info->si_pid)
> info->si_pid = getpid();

I doubt very much we can do this. This can break the existing applications
which can overload ->si_pid. I think it is better to pass ->si_pid as is.
If user-space sends siginfo_t so sub-namespace, it must know what it does.
I don't think the kernel can help, it just can't know what ->si_pid actually
means. Unless this is documented somewhere, but I don't know.

> | But how can send_signal() know that the signal comes from the upper ns?
> | This is not trivial, we can't blindly use current to check. The signal
> | can be sent from irq/workqueue/etc.
>
> You mean the in_interrupt() check we had in earlier patchset would
> not be enough ?

I don't think we can rely on in_interrupt() check. Thnk about some device
drivers which can send the notification from workqueue, or from kernel
thread... Say, can you see when drivers/usb/core/devio.c does
async_completed() ? And note that SI_ASYNCIO is SI_FROMUSER.

Even _if_ it is safe to use in_interrupt() right now, I don't think we
can rely on this fact.

> | Perhaps we can start with something like the patch below. Not that I like
> | it very much though. We should really place this code under
> | CONFIG_I_DO_CARE_ABOUT_NAMESPACES ;)
>
> CONFIG_PID_NS ?

Ah yes, we have it ;)

Oleg.