Re: [PATCH v4] ptrace: Fix fork event messages across pid namespaces

From: Oleg Nesterov
Date: Mon Apr 07 2014 - 15:06:11 EST


On 04/03, Matthew Dempsky wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 8:44 AM, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Some notes for potential future changes...
> >
> > - I do not not see any potential user of ptrace_event_pid() outside
> > of fork.c, so perhaps this helper should not be exported.
> >
> > In fact I wouldn't mind if you send v5 which moves it into fork.c ;)
>
> Like you mentioned, it's potentially used by fs/exec.c too, which I
> was intending to send a followup patch for.

OK, agreed. Probably we can tolerate the extra get/put_pid() but make
this code look better.

> > - OTOH, calculating pid_nr in the namespace of ->parent can probably
> > go into another simple (exported) helper. do_notify_parent_*() and
> > exec_binprm() could use it, even they do not have the problem with
> > task_active_pid_ns(parent) == NULL. Not sure.
>
> I think do_notify_parent_*() are safe from task_active_pid_ns(parent)
> == NULL because they're under tasklist_lock,

Yes, they are fine correctness-wise, just this task_pid_nr_ns(...) doesn't
look readable. OK, please forget, from_kuid_munged() doesn't look better.

> but it looks like
> exec_binprm() is theoretically racy

No (if you meant task_pid_nr_ns() == NULL). Note that __task_pid_nr_ns()
checks ns != NULL. In fact this is bad, this just reminds that we have
too many helpers with the subtle differences ;)

But if you meant that it can report the wrong pid then yes, of course,
it can race with detach/attach too.

Oleg.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/