[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1104201317410.31768@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 13:24:26 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
John Stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>
cc: Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Michal Nazarewicz <mina86@...a86.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] break out page allocation warning code
On Wed, 20 Apr 2011, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > That was true a while ago, but you now need to protect every thread's
> > ->comm with get_task_comm() or ensuring task_lock() is held to protect
> > against /proc/pid/comm which can change other thread's ->comm. That was
> > different before when prctl(PR_SET_NAME) would only operate on current, so
> > no lock was needed when reading current->comm.
>
> Right. /proc/pid/comm is evil. We have to fix it. otherwise we need change
> all of current->comm user. It's very lots!
>
Fixing it in this case would be removing it and only allowing it for
current via the usual prctl() :) The code was introduced in 4614a696bd1c
(procfs: allow threads to rename siblings via /proc/pid/tasks/tid/comm) in
December 2009 and seems to originally be meant for debugging. We simply
can't continue to let it modify any thread's ->comm unless we change the
over 300 current->comm deferences in the kernel.
I'd prefer that we remove /proc/pid/comm entirely or at least prevent
writing to it unless CONFIG_EXPERT.
--
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