[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20071206170145.GA10674@tv-sign.ru>
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2007 20:01:45 +0300
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Linux Containers <containers@...ts.osdl.org>,
Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>, sukadev@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pid: sys_wait... fixes
On 12/05, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> This modifies do_wait and eligible_child to take a pair of
> enum pid_type and struct pid *pid to precisely specify what
> set of processes are eligible to be waited for, instead of the
> raw pid_t value from sys_wait4.
Personally, I like this patch very much. Not only it fixes the bug,
in my opinion it also makes the code more clean.
However at first glance it has a minor fixable problem,
> + if (type < PIDTYPE_MAX) {
> + if (p->pids[type].pid != pid)
> return 0;
> }
If type != PIDTYPE_PID we can't trust p->pids[type].pid unless p is a
group leader. This .pid could be just a "random value".
Oleg.
--
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