linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Send quota messages via netlink

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]

Message-Id: <20070828211335.37fce4c9.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Tue, 28 Aug 2007 21:13:35 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Balbir Singh <balbir@...ibm.com>,
	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	containers@...ts.osdl.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Send quota messages via netlink

On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 16:13:18 +0200 Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz> wrote:

>   Hello,
> 
>   I'm sending rediffed patch implementing sending of quota messages via netlink
> interface (some rationale in patch description). I've already posted it to
> LKML some time ago and there were no objections, so I guess it's fine to put
> it to -mm. Andrew, would you be so kind? Thanks.
>   Userspace deamon reading the messages from the kernel and sending them to
> dbus and/or user console is also written (it's part of quota-tools). The
> only remaining problem is there are a few changes needed to libnl needed for
> the userspace daemon. They were basically acked by the maintainer but it
> seems he has not merged the patches yet. So this will take a bit more time.
> 

So it's a new kernel->userspace interface.

But we have no description of the interface :(

> +/* Send warning to userspace about user which exceeded quota */
> +static void send_warning(const struct dquot *dquot, const char warntype)
> +{
> +	static unsigned long seq;
> +	struct sk_buff *skb;
> +	void *msg_head;
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	skb = genlmsg_new(QUOTA_NL_MSG_SIZE, GFP_NOFS);
> +	if (!skb) {
> +		printk(KERN_ERR
> +		  "VFS: Not enough memory to send quota warning.\n");
> +		return;
> +	}
> +	msg_head = genlmsg_put(skb, 0, seq++, &quota_genl_family, 0, QUOTA_NL_C_WARNING);
> +	if (!msg_head) {
> +		printk(KERN_ERR
> +		  "VFS: Cannot store netlink header in quota warning.\n");
> +		goto err_out;
> +	}
> +	ret = nla_put_u32(skb, QUOTA_NL_A_QTYPE, dquot->dq_type);
> +	if (ret)
> +		goto attr_err_out;
> +	ret = nla_put_u64(skb, QUOTA_NL_A_EXCESS_ID, dquot->dq_id);
> +	if (ret)
> +		goto attr_err_out;
> +	ret = nla_put_u32(skb, QUOTA_NL_A_WARNING, warntype);
> +	if (ret)
> +		goto attr_err_out;
> +	ret = nla_put_u32(skb, QUOTA_NL_A_DEV_MAJOR,
> +		MAJOR(dquot->dq_sb->s_dev));
> +	if (ret)
> +		goto attr_err_out;
> +	ret = nla_put_u32(skb, QUOTA_NL_A_DEV_MINOR,
> +		MINOR(dquot->dq_sb->s_dev));
> +	if (ret)
> +		goto attr_err_out;
> +	ret = nla_put_u64(skb, QUOTA_NL_A_CAUSED_ID, current->user->uid);
> +	if (ret)
> +		goto attr_err_out;
> +	genlmsg_end(skb, msg_head);
> +
> +	ret = genlmsg_multicast(skb, 0, quota_genl_family.id, GFP_NOFS);
> +	if (ret < 0 && ret != -ESRCH)
> +		printk(KERN_ERR
> +			"VFS: Failed to send notification message: %d\n", ret);
> +	return;
> +attr_err_out:
> +	printk(KERN_ERR "VFS: Failed to compose quota message: %d\n", ret);
> +err_out:
> +	kfree_skb(skb);
> +}
> +#endif

This is it.  Normally netlink payloads are represented as a struct.  How
come this one is built-by-hand?

It doesn't appear to be versioned.  Should it be?

Does it have (or need) reserved-set-to-zero space for expansion?  Again,
hard to tell..

I guess it's OK to send a major and minor out of the kernel like this. 
What's it for?  To represent a filesytem?  I wonder if there's a more
modern and useful way of describing the fs.  Path to mountpoint or
something?

I suspect the namespace virtualisation guys would be interested in a new
interface which is sending current->user->uid up to userspace.  uids are
per-namespace now.  What are the implications?  (cc's added)

Is it worth adding a comment explaining why GFP_NOFS is used here?


-
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/