[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4CCFF1BA.1010206@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2010 07:10:50 -0400
From: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To: Christopher Yeoh <cyeoh@....ibm.com>
CC: Bryan Donlan <bdonlan@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Cross Memory Attach
On 11/01/2010 11:37 PM, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
> >
> > You could have each process open /proc/self/mem and pass the fd using
> > SCM_RIGHTS.
> >
> > That eliminates a race; with copy_to_process(), by the time the pid
> > is looked up it might designate a different process.
>
> Just to revive an old thread (I've been on holidays), but this doesn't
> work either. the ptrace check is done by mem_read (eg on each read) so
> even if you do pass the fd using SCM_RIGHTS, reads on the fd still
> fail.
>
> So unless there's good reason to believe that the ptrace permission
> check is no longer needed, the /proc/pid/mem interface doesn't seem to
> be an option for what we want to do.
>
Perhaps move the check to open(). I can understand the desire to avoid
letting random processes peek each other's memory, but once a process
has opened its own /proc/self/mem and explicitly passed it to another,
we should allow it.
--
I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this
signature is too narrow to contain.
--
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