linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH repost] sched: export sched

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: <20100730141901.GA9076@redhat.com>
Date:	Fri, 30 Jul 2010 16:19:01 +0200
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
Cc:	Sridhar Samudrala <sri@...ibm.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Dmitri Vorobiev <dmitri.vorobiev@...ial.com>,
	Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH repost] sched: export sched_set/getaffinity to modules

Sorry for the delay, I can't be responsive these days...

On 07/27, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 08:08:34PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > On 07/26, Sridhar Samudrala wrote:
> > >
> > > I have been testing out a similar patch that uses kernel_thread() without CLONE_FILES
> > > flag rather than create_kthread() and then closing the files.
> >
> > !CLONE_FILES can't help. copy_files() does dup_fd() in this case.
> > The child still inherits the files.
> >
> > > Either version should be fine.
> >
> > I think neither version is fine ;)
> >
> > exit_files() is not enough too. How about the signals, reparenting?
> >
> >
> > I already forgot all details, probably I missed somethig. But it
> > seems to me that it is better to just export get/set affinity and
> > forget about all complications.
> >
> > Oleg.
>
> Oleg, so can I attach your Ack to the patch in question, and merge
> it all through net-next?

Well, I do not think you need my ack ;)

But I must admit, I personally dislike this idea. A kernel thread which
is the child of the user-space process, and in fact it is not the "real"
kernel thread. I think this is against the common case. If you do not
care the signals/reparenting, why can't you fork the user-space process
which does all the work via ioctl's ? OK, I do not understand the problem
domain, probably this can't work.

Anyway, the patch looks buggy to me. Starting from

	create_kthread(&create);
	wait_for_completion(&create.done);

At least you should check create_kthread() suceeds, otherwise
wait_for_completion() will hang forever. OTOH, if it suceeds then
wait_for_completion() is not needed. But this is minor.

create_kthread()->kernel_thread() uses CLONE_VM, this means that the
child will share ->mm. And this means that if the parent recieves
the coredumping signal it will hang forever in kernel space waiting
until this child exits.

This is just the immediate surprise I can see with this approach,
I am afraid there is something else.

And once again. We are doing this hacks only because we lack a
couples of exports (iiuk). This is, well, a bit strange ;)

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/