| 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: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 11:09:38 +0100
From: Daniel Wagner <wagi@...om.org>
To: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>
Cc: Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>,
John Fastabend <john.r.fastabend@...el.com>,
Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>,
Daniel Wagner <daniel.wagner@...-carit.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Cgroups <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [BUG] Bug in netprio_cgroup and netcls_cgroup ?
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 09:18:38AM -0800, John Fastabend wrote:
> On 01/21/2013 01:57 AM, Li Zefan wrote:
> > On 2013/1/21 17:27, Daniel Wagner wrote:
> >> On 21.01.2013 10:01, Li Zefan wrote:
> >>> On 2013/1/21 16:50, Daniel Wagner wrote:
> >>>> Hi Li,
> >>>>
> >>>> On 21.01.2013 07:08, Li Zefan wrote:
> >>>>> I'm not a network developer, so correct me if I'm wrong.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Since commit 7955490f732c2b8
> >>>>> ("net: netprio_cgroup: rework update socket logic"), sock->sk->sk_cgrp_prioidx
> >>>>> is set when the socket is created, and won't be updated unless the task is
> >>>>> moved to another cgroup.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Now the problem is, a socket can be _shared_ by multiple processes (fork, SCM_RIGHT).
> >>>>> If we place those processes in different cgroups, and each cgroup has
> >>>>> different configs, but all of the processes will send data via this socket
> >>>>> with the same network priority.
> >>>>
> >>>> Wouldn't that be addressed by 48a87cc26c13b68f6cce4e9d769fcb17a6b3e4b8
> >>>>
> >>>> net: netprio: fd passed in SCM_RIGHTS datagram not set correctly
> >>>>
> >>>> A socket fd passed in a SCM_RIGHTS datagram was not getting
> >>>> updated with the new tasks cgrp prioidx. This leaves IO on
> >>>> the socket tagged with the old tasks priority.
> >>>>
> >>>> To fix this add a check in the scm recvmsg path to update the
> >>>> sock cgrp prioidx with the new tasks value.
> >>>>
> >>>> As I read this this should work for net_prio.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> But after process A passed the socket fd to B, both A and B can use the
> >>> same socket to send data, right? Then if A and B were placed in different
> >>> cgroups with differnt configs, A's config won't take effect anymore.
> >>>
> >>> Am I missing something?
> >>
> >> I don't know. I guess at one point the socket resources are shared and then
> >> one configuration is taking preference. As you can see I am far away of
> >> being
> >> an expert in this field. Hopefully someone who understands this bits
> >> can chip in.
> >>
> >> BTW, isn't this a similar to what should happen with the block io cgroup?
> >> What is the behavior with a fd writing to a file in the scenario you
> >> describe above?
> >>
> >
> > It forbids task moving in this case:
> >
> > /*
> > * We cannot support shared io contexts, as we have no mean to support
> > * two tasks with the same ioc in two different groups without major rework
> > * of the main cic data structures. For now we allow a task to change
> > * its cgroup only if it's the only owner of its ioc.
> > */
> > static int blkcg_can_attach(struct cgroup *cgrp, struct cgroup_taskset *tset)
> >
>
> OK, I guess we should do something similar in the netprio, netcls
> cgroups and
> yes document it as you noted in your last comment.
Here is my attempt to add such a check. I really don't know if this is the
correct way to do so. To test this I have written a test program, which
seems to test the right thing. Please have a look and let me know if
it is correct: http://www.monom.org/misc/scm_rights.c
And here a dirty first version of the patch:
>From 49a78d907eaf31c16673025e7e3b4844e419e416 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Daniel Wagner <daniel.wagner@...-carit.de>
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 11:08:22 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] net: net_prio: Block attach if a socket is shared
---
net/core/netprio_cgroup.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 30 insertions(+)
diff --git a/net/core/netprio_cgroup.c b/net/core/netprio_cgroup.c
index 847c02b..de4e6c5 100644
--- a/net/core/netprio_cgroup.c
+++ b/net/core/netprio_cgroup.c
@@ -274,9 +274,39 @@ static struct cftype ss_files[] = {
{ } /* terminate */
};
+static int check_cnt(const void *v, struct file *file, unsigned n)
+{
+ unsigned *flag = (unsigned *)v;
+ int err;
+
+ struct socket *sock = sock_from_file(file, &err);
+ if (sock && file_count(file) > 1)
+ *flag = 1;
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static int cgrp_can_attach(struct cgroup *cgrp, struct cgroup_taskset *tset)
+{
+ struct task_struct *p;
+ unsigned flag = 0;
+
+ cgroup_taskset_for_each(p, cgrp, tset) {
+ task_lock(p);
+ iterate_fd(p->files, 0, check_cnt, &flag);
+ task_unlock(p);
+ }
+
+ if (flag != 0)
+ return -EINVAL;
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
struct cgroup_subsys net_prio_subsys = {
.name = "net_prio",
.create = cgrp_create,
+ .can_attach = cgrp_can_attach,
.destroy = cgrp_destroy,
.attach = net_prio_attach,
.subsys_id = net_prio_subsys_id,
--
1.8.0.rc0
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists