netdev - Re: [Bug 106241] New: shutdown(3)/close(3) behaviour is incorrect for sockets in accept(3)

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 31 Oct 2015 21:51:16 +0000
From:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
	Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Bug 106241] New: shutdown(3)/close(3) behaviour is incorrect
 for sockets in accept(3)

On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 02:23:31PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> The other stuff we probably can't do all that much about. Unless we
> decide to go for some complicated lockless optimistic file descriptor
> allocation scheme with retry-on-failure instead of locks. Which I'm
> sure is possible, but I'm equally sure is painful.

The interesting part is dup2() - we'd have to do something like
	serialize against other dup2
	was_claimed = atomically set and test bit in bitmap
	if was_claimed
		tofree = fdt->fd[fd];
		if (!tofree)
			fail with EBUSY
	install into ->fd[...]
	end of critical area
in there; __alloc_fd() could be made retry-on-failure, but I don't see
how to cope with dup2 vs. dup2 without an explicit exclusion.
--
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