lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 08:08:01 +0100 From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> To: Ian Kent <raven@...maw.net> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, hpa@...or.com, Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>, Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "SergeE.Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] autofs: fix the wrong usage of the deprecated task_pgrp_nr() On 01/19, Ian Kent wrote: > > On Sun, 2009-01-18 at 08:34 +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > parse_options(&pgid) sets pgid = task_pgrp_nr() which uses the global > > namespace. This is wrong, we use this pgid to find "struct pid" in the > > current's namespace. Change parse_options() to use task_pgrp_vnr(). > > > > Also do s/task_pgrp_nr/task_pgrp_vnr/ in the debugging printks. > > checkpatch.pl complains about "line over 80 characters", but it should > > blame the cuurent code, not the patch. > > This changelog entry doesn't really have anything that I can use to work > out if this change might introduce regressions. > > It would be helpful to me if you could include: > 1) A brief statement about what your trying to achieve and why. First of all, I think this patch fixes a bug. What we are doing in autofs_fill_super()->parse_options() path is find_get_pid(task_pgrp_vnr(current)), this is wrong. task_pgrp_vnr() reporst the pid_t in the global namespace, but find_get_pid() searches "struct pid" in the current namespace. We can get the wrong pid. I tried to document this in changelog. Another reason is that task_pgrp_nr() is deprecated. We are wasting 2 words in signal_struct without good reason. Please look at http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=123228947019281 > 2) The reason why task_pgrp_nr() has changed to task_pgrp_vnr() since > you made the change (that is someone working on pid namespaces) to > task_pgrp_nr(). see above. > 3) Why you believe this change won't introduce a regression. Ah, sorry. I forgot to mention this patch is only compile tested (like the next one, but at least it has the note in changelog). But again, I think this is bugfix. Oleg. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists