[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20111110184654.GA1006@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 19:46:54 +0100
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...nvz.org>,
Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>,
Nathan Lynch <ntl@...ox.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Serge Hallyn <serue@...ibm.com>,
Daniel Lezcano <dlezcano@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] pids: Make it possible to clone tasks with given
pids
On 11/10, Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
>
> The child_tidptr points to an array of pids for current namespace and
> its ancestors. When 0 is met in this array the pid number for the
> corresponding namespace is generated, rather than set.
I must have missed something, but I can't unserstand how this works.
> For security reasons after a regular clone/fork is done in a namespace
> further cloning with predefined pid is not allowed.
I guess, this is pid_ns->last_pid != 0 check in set_pidmap(), right ?
> +static int set_pidmap(struct pid_namespace *pid_ns, int pid)
> +{
> + int offset;
> + struct pidmap *map;
> +
> + offset = pid & BITS_PER_PAGE_MASK;
> + map = &pid_ns->pidmap[pid/BITS_PER_PAGE];
> +
> + if (unlikely(!map->page))
> + if (alloc_pidmap_page(map))
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + if (pid_ns->last_pid != 0)
> + return -EPERM;
OK, but it should be always true, no? IOW, set_pidmap() should always
fail?
Unless: you are using CLONE_NEWPID along with CLONE_CHILD_USEPIDS and
this child_tidptr array has only one pid (before zero pid).
So, could you please explain what I have missed?
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists