From: Marcos Paulo de Souza <marcos.souza.org@gmail.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>,
Hari Bathini <hbathini@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] fork.c: Move check of clone NEWIPC and SYSVSEM to copy_process
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2017 22:33:43 -0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171130003341.GA14339@marcos-builder> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171130100406.qnn2zofbfaviorgs@dhcp22.suse.cz>
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 11:04:06AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> CC Eric
>
> On Sun 26-11-17 14:06:52, Marcos Paulo de Souza wrote:
> > Currently this check for CLONE_NEWIPC with CLONE_SYSVSEM is done inside
> > copy_namespaces, resulting in a handful of error paths being executed if
> > these flags were used together. So, move this check to the beginning of
> > copy_process, exiting earlier if the condition is true.
> >
> > This move is safe because copy_namespaces is called just from
> > copy_process function.
This change is introduced right below the point where clone_flags is already
checking for inconsistencies in namespace flags[1], and returns EINVAL when
conflicting flags are informed together.
In this case, it's easier to return early when conflicting flags are informed at
the beginning, so moving a namespace check to where namespaces are already being
sanitized makes sense. If the code stays where it is now, and a user calls clone
syscalls informing CLONE_NEWIPC | CLONE_SYSVSEM, the code will need to undo a
lot of work before returning the same EINVAL[2].
[1] https://elixir.free-electrons.com/linux/latest/source/kernel/fork.c#L1552
[2] https://elixir.free-electrons.com/linux/latest/source/kernel/fork.c#L1953
>
> I am not familiar with the code all that much but the justification is
> not clear to me. Thesea re namespace related flags so why should we pull
> them out of copy_namespaces. I do not see any simplifications in the
> error code paths or something like that.
>
> > Signed-off-by: Marcos Paulo de Souza <marcos.souza.org@gmail.com>
> > ---
> > kernel/fork.c | 11 +++++++++++
> > kernel/nsproxy.c | 11 -----------
> > 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/fork.c b/kernel/fork.c
> > index 2113e252cb9d..691f9ba135fc 100644
> > --- a/kernel/fork.c
> > +++ b/kernel/fork.c
> > @@ -1600,6 +1600,17 @@ static __latent_entropy struct task_struct *copy_process(
> > return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
> >
> > /*
> > + * CLONE_NEWIPC must detach from the undolist: after switching
> > + * to a new ipc namespace, the semaphore arrays from the old
> > + * namespace are unreachable. In clone parlance, CLONE_SYSVSEM
> > + * means share undolist with parent, so we must forbid using
> > + * it along with CLONE_NEWIPC.
> > + */
> > + if ((clone_flags & (CLONE_NEWIPC | CLONE_SYSVSEM)) ==
> > + (CLONE_NEWIPC | CLONE_SYSVSEM))
> > + return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
> > +
> > + /*
> > * Thread groups must share signals as well, and detached threads
> > * can only be started up within the thread group.
> > */
> > diff --git a/kernel/nsproxy.c b/kernel/nsproxy.c
> > index f6c5d330059a..30882727dff5 100644
> > --- a/kernel/nsproxy.c
> > +++ b/kernel/nsproxy.c
> > @@ -151,17 +151,6 @@ int copy_namespaces(unsigned long flags, struct task_struct *tsk)
> > if (!ns_capable(user_ns, CAP_SYS_ADMIN))
> > return -EPERM;
> >
> > - /*
> > - * CLONE_NEWIPC must detach from the undolist: after switching
> > - * to a new ipc namespace, the semaphore arrays from the old
> > - * namespace are unreachable. In clone parlance, CLONE_SYSVSEM
> > - * means share undolist with parent, so we must forbid using
> > - * it along with CLONE_NEWIPC.
> > - */
> > - if ((flags & (CLONE_NEWIPC | CLONE_SYSVSEM)) ==
> > - (CLONE_NEWIPC | CLONE_SYSVSEM))
> > - return -EINVAL;
> > -
> > new_ns = create_new_namespaces(flags, tsk, user_ns, tsk->fs);
> > if (IS_ERR(new_ns))
> > return PTR_ERR(new_ns);
> > --
> > 2.13.6
> >
>
> --
> Michal Hocko
> SUSE Labs
--
Thanks,
Marcos
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-11-30 15:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-11-26 16:06 [PATCH -next] fork.c: Move check of clone NEWIPC and SYSVSEM to copy_process Marcos Paulo de Souza
2017-11-30 10:04 ` Michal Hocko
2017-11-30 0:33 ` Marcos Paulo de Souza [this message]
2017-12-01 8:19 ` Michal Hocko
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=20171130003341.GA14339@marcos-builder \
--to=marcos.souza.org@gmail.com \
--cc=acme@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=hbathini@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
/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