[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100625220713.GA31123@us.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2010 15:07:13 -0700
From: Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linux Containers <containers@...ts.osdl.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH] pid_ns: Fix proc_flush_task() accessing freed
proc_mnt
Oleg Nesterov [oleg@...hat.com] wrote:
| On 06/25, Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote:
| >
| > Oleg Nesterov [oleg@...hat.com] wrote:
| > | On 06/25, Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote:
| > | >
| > | > Louis Rilling [Louis.Rilling@...labs.com] wrote:
| > | > | - proc_pid_readdir():
| > | > | Needs similar check and protection to proc_pid_lookup(), but there is another
| > | > | issue: next_tgid() can find a dying task:
| > | >
| > | > Hmm, I thought proc_pid_readdir() would be a problem too but convinced myself
| > | > that it would not - since a process running proc_pid_readdir() would have
| > | > a reference to the pid namespace,
| > |
| > | Where does this reference comes from ?
| >
| > Caller of proc_pid_readdir() would be living in the same pid namespace right ?
|
| Afaics, in general not.
|
| Suppose that we do something like
|
| if (!clone(CLONE_NEWPID)) {
| mount("none", "/SUB_PROC", "proc", 0, NULL);
| exit();
| }
|
| After that /SUB_PROC/ still exists, one can do "ls /SUB_PROC/".
Yes, I see it now. Thanks,
Sukadev
--
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