linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] procfs: Do not release pid_ns->proc

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: <20100617213638.GB4182@redhat.com>
Date:	Thu, 17 Jun 2010 23:36:38 +0200
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc:	Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com>,
	Louis Rilling <louis.rilling@...labs.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>,
	Linux Containers <containers@...ts.osdl.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] procfs: Do not release pid_ns->proc_mnt too early

On 06/17, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> The task->children isn't changed until __unhash_process() which runs
> after flush_proc_task().

Yes. But this is only the current implementation detail.
It would be nice to cleanup the code so that EXIT_DEAD tasks are
never sit in ->children list.

> So we should be able to come up with
> a variant of do_wait() that zap_pid_ns_processes can use that does
> what we need.

See above...

Even if we modify do_wait() or add the new variant, how the caller
can wait for EXIT_DEAD tasks? I don't think we want to modify
release_task() to do __wake_up_parent() or something similar.

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/