From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@virtuozzo.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
jslaby@suse.com, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, keescook@chromium.org,
serge@hallyn.com, james.l.morris@oracle.com, luto@kernel.org,
john.johansen@canonical.com, mingo@kernel.org,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, mhocko@suse.com, peterz@infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] tty: Iterate only thread group leaders in __do_SAK()
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2018 17:42:34 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180112164234.GA21532@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <50c23f46-f4ad-b6c8-b7bc-0a8d8449c62f@virtuozzo.com>
On 01/12, Kirill Tkhai wrote:
>
> How about this patch instead of the whole set? I left thread iterations
> and added sighand locking for visability.
Kirill, I didn't really read this series so I don't quite understand what
are you actually trying to do...
__do_SAK() is racy anyway, a process can open tty right after it was checked,
and I do not understand why should we care about races with execve.
IOW, I do not understand why we can't simply use rcu_read_lock() after
do_each_pid_task/while_each_pid_task. Yes we can miss the new process/thread,
but if the creator process had this tty opened it should be killed by us so
fork/clone can't succeed: both do_fork() and send_sig() take the same lock
and do_fork() checks signal_pending() under ->siglock.
No?
And whatever we do, I think you are right and for_each_process() makes more
sense, and in the likely case all sub-threads should share the same file_struct.
So perhaps we should start with the simple cleanup? Say,
for_each_process(p) {
if (p->signal->tty == tty) {
tty_notice(tty, "SAK: killed process %d (%s): by controlling tty\n",
task_pid_nr(p), p->comm);
goto kill;
}
files = NULL;
for_each_thread(p, t) {
if (t->files == files) /* racy but we do not care */
continue;
task_lock(t);
files = t->files;
i = iterate_fd(files, 0, this_tty, tty);
task_unlock(t);
if (i != 0) {
tty_notice(tty, "SAK: killed process %d (%s): by fd#%d\n",
task_pid_nr(p), p->comm, i - 1);
goto kill;
}
}
continue;
kill:
force_sig(SIGKILL, p);
}
(see the uncompiled/untested patch below), then make another change to avoid
tasklist_lock?
Oleg.
--- a/drivers/tty/tty_io.c
+++ b/drivers/tty/tty_io.c
@@ -2704,7 +2704,8 @@ void __do_SAK(struct tty_struct *tty)
#ifdef TTY_SOFT_SAK
tty_hangup(tty);
#else
- struct task_struct *g, *p;
+ struct task_struct *p, *t;
+ struct files_struct files;
struct pid *session;
int i;
@@ -2725,22 +2726,34 @@ void __do_SAK(struct tty_struct *tty)
} while_each_pid_task(session, PIDTYPE_SID, p);
/* Now kill any processes that happen to have the tty open */
- do_each_thread(g, p) {
+ for_each_process(p) {
if (p->signal->tty == tty) {
tty_notice(tty, "SAK: killed process %d (%s): by controlling tty\n",
task_pid_nr(p), p->comm);
- send_sig(SIGKILL, p, 1);
- continue;
+ goto kill;
}
- task_lock(p);
- i = iterate_fd(p->files, 0, this_tty, tty);
- if (i != 0) {
- tty_notice(tty, "SAK: killed process %d (%s): by fd#%d\n",
- task_pid_nr(p), p->comm, i - 1);
- force_sig(SIGKILL, p);
+
+ files = NULL;
+ for_each_thread(p, t) {
+ if (t->files == files) /* racy but we do not care */
+ continue;
+
+ task_lock(t);
+ files = t->files;
+ i = iterate_fd(files, 0, this_tty, tty);
+ task_unlock(t);
+
+ if (i != 0) {
+ tty_notice(tty, "SAK: killed process %d (%s): by fd#%d\n",
+ task_pid_nr(p), p->comm, i - 1);
+ goto kill;
+ }
}
- task_unlock(p);
- } while_each_thread(g, p);
+
+ continue;
+kill:
+ force_sig(SIGKILL, p);
+ }
read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
#endif
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-01-12 16:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-01-11 15:49 [PATCH 0/4] fs, tty: Make __do_SAK() less greedy in regard to tasklist_lock Kirill Tkhai
2018-01-11 15:50 ` [PATCH 1/4] exec: Pass unshared files_struct to load_binary() Kirill Tkhai
2018-01-11 15:50 ` [PATCH 2/4] exec: Assign unshared files after there is no way back Kirill Tkhai
2018-01-11 15:50 ` [PATCH 3/4] tty: Iterate only thread group leaders in __do_SAK() Kirill Tkhai
2018-01-11 18:34 ` Oleg Nesterov
2018-01-12 8:42 ` Kirill Tkhai
2018-01-12 10:05 ` Kirill Tkhai
2018-01-12 16:42 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2018-01-15 9:32 ` Kirill Tkhai
2018-01-15 20:51 ` Oleg Nesterov
2018-01-16 11:33 ` Kirill Tkhai
2018-01-16 21:13 ` Oleg Nesterov
2018-01-17 12:47 ` Kirill Tkhai
2018-01-11 15:50 ` [PATCH 4/4] tty: Use RCU read lock to iterate tasks " Kirill Tkhai
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=20180112164234.GA21532@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=james.l.morris@oracle.com \
--cc=john.johansen@canonical.com \
--cc=jslaby@suse.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=ktkhai@virtuozzo.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=serge@hallyn.com \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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