[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070130030039.GB21829@sergelap.austin.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 21:00:39 -0600
From: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>,
Cedric Le Goater <clg@...ibm.com>,
Daniel Hokka Zakrisson <daniel@...ac.com>,
trond.myklebust@....uio.no,
Linux Containers <containers@...ts.osdl.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] namespaces: fix exit race by splitting exit
Quoting Herbert Poetzl (herbert@...hfloor.at):
> On Thu, Jan 25, 2007 at 10:30:56PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Thu, 25 Jan 2007 23:26:59 -0600
> > "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Fix exit race by splitting the nsproxy putting into two pieces.
> > > First piece reduces the nsproxy refcount. If we dropped the last
> > > reference, then it puts the mnt_ns, and returns the nsproxy as a
> > > hint to the caller. Else it returns NULL. The second piece of
> > > exiting task namespaces sets tsk->nsproxy to NULL, and drops the
> > > references to other namespaces and frees the nsproxy only if an
> > > nsproxy was passed in.
> > >
> > > A little awkward and should probably be reworked, but hopefully
> > > it fixes the NFS oops.
> >
> > I'm a bit worried about jamming something like this into 2.6.20.
> > Could the usual culprits please review this carefully with
> > some urgency?
>
> okay, after integrating this into two Linux-VServer
> branches and some testing, I can confirm that it
> _seems_ to fix the nfs and related issues, but still,
> I do not like it :)
I don't either :)
> here my issues with this approach:
>
> - the code is quite hard to read and can easily
> lead to unexpected issues when spaces are
> manipulated
Yes, but I do think fixing the naming will help that.
> - it breaks the basic get/put refcounting for
> nsproxy references outside the task struct
> i.e. we had to add a vs_put_nsproxy() which
> does what the put_nsproxy() did before, to
> keep and handle a reference to the nsproxy
> from the context structure
Was the put_and_finalize_nsproxy() not sufficient?
> - the following scenario might become a problem
> for future spaces (especially the pid space?)
>
> A B
>
> exit_task_namespaces_early()
> exit_task_namespaces_early()
> exit_notify()
> exit_task_namespaces()
> ---------------------------------------------------
> exit_notify()
> exit_task_namespaces()
Confounded, you're right, the exit_task_namespaces() in B
would see that B had reduced the nsproxy->count to 0, and
free the nsproxy, so that exit_notify() in A would oops.
And that should be triggerable right now.
I'm afraid adding an extra refcount for the mounts is
unavoidable.
> note: I still consider it the best available fix
> for this issues, especially as 2.6.20 is in a
> late rc stage ... but IMHO the nfs threads should
> be modified to handle the nsproxy disposal properly
That *would* lead to much more readable code.
> > And Daniel, if you can find time to runtime test it please?
>
> he did, looks like it works fine with vanilla too
> (even when stressing the described cornercase)
>
> best,
> Herbert
-
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