public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Gabriel de Perthuis <g2p.code@gmail.com>
To: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
Cc: Jeff Dike <jdike@addtoit.com>,
	user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] um: Accept /dev/fd/* uml block devices
Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2013 01:08:30 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <51F998EE.80208@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <51F4F19D.3000300@gmail.com>

Le 28/07/2013 12:25, Gabriel de Perthuis a écrit :
> Le dim. 28 juil. 2013 10:12:37 CEST, Richard Weinberger a écrit :
>> Am 27.07.2013 17:23, schrieb Gabriel de Perthuis:
>>> Useful for
>>> * limiting privileges
>>> * opening block devices O_EXCL
>>
>> So, the goal of this patch is to allow passing a file descriptor
>> number as block device instead of a file?
> 
> Yes.  It turns out it already works, but not after dropping privileges.
> 
>> I assume you have already a wrapper around UML which exec()'s it such that
>> it can reuse a fd?
> 
> Yes, vido: https://github.com/g2p/vido
> 
> Here's the relevant commit:
> https://github.com/g2p/vido/commit/42d4b86eab13d90ee63138b73146485dc4e47ec6
> 
>>> Use dup to work around the fact /proc/self/fd
>>> can't be opened after dropping privileges.
>>> This proc behaviour doesn't match TLPI and might be a bug.
>>>
>>> Qemu has a slightly more complex fdset approach
>>> that provides fds with different access permissions.
>>
>> I really don't like that you patch os_open_file(), this is a
>> generic function.
> 
> The justification was that it unbreaks open("/dev/fd") to be more like
> standards suggest, but I can see how that makes it a special case.
> 
>> What about this one?
>> Allow ubda= (and all other UML block device kernel parameters) to
>> accept arguments like file:/foo/bar and fd:N.
>> Where N is a number and file: is default such that we do not break
>> old kernels.
> 
> Okay, I'll add a prefix.  Maybe file:// + /abs/path | rel/path
> since that's already standard.

I've done some work on this approach, but it turns out to clash
with the cow syntax; in ubd0=file:cowfile, ":" is a path separator.
Changing things in ubd_kern.c is also more intrusive, even with
the limited goal of making it work for plain, non-cow files I
need to duplicate a few code paths to work with fds instead of
names and the diffstat is getting large.

Because of that I'd like to come back to /dev/fd/<n>.
It does overload the generic file opener, but does so consistently,
so that you can think of /dev/fd as a virtual filesystem.
The (arguably broken) /proc/self/fd behaviour remains available
through the /proc path.


      reply	other threads:[~2013-07-31 23:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-07-27 15:23 [PATCH] um: Accept /dev/fd/* uml block devices Gabriel de Perthuis
2013-07-28  8:12 ` Richard Weinberger
2013-07-28 10:25   ` Gabriel de Perthuis
2013-07-31 23:08     ` Gabriel de Perthuis [this message]

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=51F998EE.80208@gmail.com \
    --to=g2p.code@gmail.com \
    --cc=jdike@addtoit.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=richard@nod.at \
    --cc=user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
    /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