From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760453Ab2CNTJH (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Mar 2012 15:09:07 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:4020 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1760125Ab2CNTJE (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Mar 2012 15:09:04 -0400 Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2012 19:55:10 +0100 From: Oleg Nesterov To: Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds Cc: Djalal Harouni , Alan Cox , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com, Al Viro , Alexey Dobriyan , "Eric W. Biederman" , Vasiliy Kulikov , Kees Cook , Solar Designer , WANG Cong , James Morris , linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Greg KH , Ingo Molnar , Stephen Wilson , "Jason A. Donenfeld" , Roland McGrath Subject: [PATCH 0/1] (Was: self_exec_id/parent_exec_id && CLONE_PARENT) Message-ID: <20120314185510.GA14172@redhat.com> References: <1331421919-15499-1-git-send-email-tixxdz@opendz.org> <1331421919-15499-2-git-send-email-tixxdz@opendz.org> <20120311172512.GA2729@redhat.com> <20120311174953.GB2729@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 03/11, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 10:49 AM, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > > > I am also asking because the change above looks like the fix to me. > > The child must not control its ->exit_signal, it is the parent who > > decides which signal the child should use for notification. > > > > And to me, clone(CLONE_PARENT | SIGXXX) looks like a violation of > > rule above. > > SIGXXX is for doing things like AIO with threads, but it would never > be used together with CLONE_PARENT, that would be odd and wrong. > > So I think we could disallow that - or at least try. See if anybody > notices, and if it breaks anything. > > The rule about the Linux ABI is not that the ABI is set in stone. It's > that we can't break any existing binaries. And *maybe* there are users > of CLONE_PARENT and special signals, but it sounds unlikely and would > probably confuse real programs. So feel free to just try it (early in > the 3.4 merge window - not at this point, though). OK, nobody seems to object. Andrew, could you take this patch? As for self_exec_id/parent_exec_id, this needs cleanups and fixes in any case. But perhaps we can kill them after this change. Oleg.