Date:	Fri, 16 Jan 2015 09:18:50 +0800
From:	Ian Kent <ikent@...hat.com>
To:	Jeff Layton <jeff.layton@...marydata.com>
Cc:	Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
	Oleg Nesterov <onestero@...hat.com>,
	Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@...marydata.com>,
	"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
	Benjamin Coddington <bcodding@...hat.com>,
	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/5] kmod - teach call_usermodehelper() to use a
 namespace

On Thu, 2015-01-15 at 11:45 -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Jan 2015 17:32:43 +0800
> Ian Kent <ikent@...hat.com> wrote:
> 
> > The call_usermodehelper() function executes all binaries in the
> > global "init" root context. This doesn't allow a binary to be run
> > within a namespace (eg. the namespace of a container).
> > 
> > Both containerized NFS client and NFS server need the ability to
> > execute a binary in a container's context. To do this use the init
> > process of the callers environment is used to setup the namespaces
> > in the same way the root init process is used otherwise.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Ian Kent <ikent@...hat.com>
> > Cc: Benjamin Coddington <bcodding@...hat.com>
> > Cc: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
> > Cc: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@...ldses.org>
> > Cc: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
> > Cc: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@...marydata.com>
> > Cc: Oleg Nesterov <onestero@...hat.com>
> > Cc: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
> > Cc: Jeff Layton <jeff.layton@...marydata.com>
> > ---
> >  include/linux/kmod.h |   17 +++++++
> >  kernel/kmod.c        |  119 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> >  2 files changed, 133 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/include/linux/kmod.h b/include/linux/kmod.h
> > index 15bdeed..487e68e 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/kmod.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/kmod.h
> > @@ -52,6 +52,7 @@ struct file;
> >  #define UMH_WAIT_EXEC	1	/* wait for the exec, but not the process */
> >  #define UMH_WAIT_PROC	2	/* wait for the process to complete */
> >  #define UMH_KILLABLE	4	/* wait for EXEC/PROC killable */
> > +#define UMH_USE_NS	8	/* exec using caller's init namespace */
> >  
> >  struct subprocess_info {
> >  	struct work_struct work;
> > @@ -69,6 +70,22 @@ struct subprocess_info {
> >  extern int
> >  call_usermodehelper(char *path, char **argv, char **envp, int flags);
> >  
> > +#if !defined(CONFIG_PROC_FS) || !defined(CONFIG_NAMESPACES)
> > +inline int umh_get_init_pid(pid_t *pid)
> > +{
> > +	*pid = 0;
> > +	return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +inline int umh_enter_ns(pid_t pid, struct cred *new)
> > +{
> > +	return -ENOTSUP;
> > +}
> > +#else
> > +int umh_get_init_pid(pid_t *pid);
> > +int umh_enter_ns(pid_t pid, struct cred *new);
> > +#endif
> > +
> >  extern struct subprocess_info *
> >  call_usermodehelper_setup(char *path, char **argv, char **envp, gfp_t gfp_mask,
> >  			  int (*init)(struct subprocess_info *info, struct cred *new),
> > diff --git a/kernel/kmod.c b/kernel/kmod.c
> > index 14c0188..2179e58 100644
> > --- a/kernel/kmod.c
> > +++ b/kernel/kmod.c
> > @@ -582,6 +582,97 @@ unlock:
> >  }
> >  EXPORT_SYMBOL(call_usermodehelper_exec);
> >  
> > +#if defined(CONFIG_PROC_FS) && defined(CONFIG_NAMESPACES)
> > +#define NS_PATH_MAX	35
> > +#define NS_PATH_FMT	"%lu/ns/%s"
> > +
> > +/* Note namespace name order is significant */
> > +static const char *ns_names[] = { "user", "ipc", "uts", "net", "pid", "mnt", NULL };
> > +
> > +int umh_get_init_pid(pid_t *pid)
> > +{
> > +	struct task_struct *tsk;
> > +	pid_t init_pid;
> > +
> > +	rcu_read_lock();
> > +	tsk = find_task_by_vpid(1);
> > +	if (tsk)
> > +		get_task_struct(tsk);
> > +	rcu_read_unlock();
> > +	if (!tsk)
> > +		return -ESRCH;
> > +	init_pid = task_pid_nr(tsk);
> > +	put_task_struct(tsk);
> > +
> > +	*pid = init_pid;
> > +
> > +	return 0;
> > +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(umh_get_init_pid);
> > +
> 
> nit: pid_t == int, so you could just make this function return the
> pid or a negative error code instead of dealing with a return argument.

True, but it worries me that pid_t might one day become an unsigned int
or long and something like that would be a hidden problem.

> 
> > +int umh_enter_ns(pid_t pid, struct cred *new)
> > +{
> > +	char path[NS_PATH_MAX];
> > +	struct vfsmount *mnt;
> > +	const char *name;
> > +	int err = 0;
> > +
> > +	/*
> > +	 * The user mode thread runner runs in the root init namespace
> > +	 * so it will see all system pids.
> > +	 */
> > +	mnt = task_active_pid_ns(current)->proc_mnt;
> > +
> > +	for (name = ns_names[0]; *name; name++) {
> > +		struct file *this;
> > +		int len;
> > +
> > +		len = snprintf(path,
> > +			       NS_PATH_MAX, NS_PATH_FMT,
> > +			       (unsigned long) pid, name);
> > +		if (len >= NS_PATH_MAX) {
> > +			err = -ENAMETOOLONG;
> > +			break;
> > +		}
> > +
> > +		this = file_open_root(mnt->mnt_root, mnt, path, O_RDONLY);
> > +		if (unlikely(IS_ERR(this))) {
> > +			err = PTR_ERR(this);
> > +			break;
> > +		}
> > +
> > +		err = setns_inode(file_inode(this), 0);
> > +		fput(this);
> > +		if (err)
> > +			break;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	return err;
> > +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(umh_enter_ns);
> > +
> > +static int umh_set_ns(struct subprocess_info *info, struct cred *new)
> > +{
> > +	pid_t *init_pid = (pid_t *) info->data;
> > +
> > +	return umh_enter_ns(*init_pid, new);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void umh_free_ns(struct subprocess_info *info)
> > +{
> > +	kfree(info->data);
> > +}
> > +#else
> > +static int umh_set_ns(struct subprocess_info *info, struct cred *new)
> > +{
> > +	return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void umh_free_ns(struct subprocess_info *info)
> > +{
> > +}
> > +#endif
> > +
> >  /**
> >   * call_usermodehelper() - prepare and start a usermode application
> >   * @path: path to usermode executable
> > @@ -599,11 +690,33 @@ int call_usermodehelper(char *path, char **argv, char **envp, int flags)
> >  {
> >  	struct subprocess_info *info;
> >  	gfp_t gfp_mask = (flags == UMH_NO_WAIT) ? GFP_ATOMIC : GFP_KERNEL;
> > +	unsigned int use_ns = flags & UMH_USE_NS;
> > +	pid_t init_pid = 0;
> > +	pid_t *pid = NULL;
> >  
> > -	info = call_usermodehelper_setup(path, argv, envp, gfp_mask,
> > -					 NULL, NULL, NULL);
> > -	if (info == NULL)
> > +	if (use_ns) {
> > +		int ret = umh_get_init_pid(&init_pid);
> > +		if (ret)
> > +			return ret;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	if (!init_pid)
> > +		info = call_usermodehelper_setup(path, argv, envp,
> > +						 gfp_mask, NULL, NULL, NULL);
> > +	else {
> > +		pid = kmalloc(sizeof(pid_t), gfp_mask);
> > +		if (!pid)
> > +			return -ENOMEM;
> > +		*pid = init_pid;
> > +		info = call_usermodehelper_setup(path, argv, envp, gfp_mask,
> > +						 umh_set_ns, umh_free_ns,
> > +						 pid);
> > +	}
> 
> Is this racy?
> 
> What guarantees that that pid will still be there (and in its correct
> incarnation) once you get around to spawning the helper? After all,
> this is just done via workqueues. Between the time that the work is
> scheduled and picked up by the workqueue the whole namespace could
> be torn down and a new process could grab that pid.

Yeah, it is racy, it'll need more work.

> 
> Maybe it would be better instead to deal with task_structs directly,
> and ensure that the correct init process task_struct is pinned until
> the new process is spawned? (or maybe even until it exits?)

That might be the way to do it but lets establish if the approach is
viable before putting time into fixing it.

> 
> > +	if (info == NULL) {
> > +		if (pid)
> > +			kfree(pid);
> >  		return -ENOMEM;
> > +	}
> >  
> >  	return call_usermodehelper_exec(info, flags);
> >  }
> > 
> 
> 


--
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