linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 07/11] pidns: Wait in zap_pid_ns_processes until pid_ns->nr

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: <20121219184757.GB22991@redhat.com>
Date:	Wed, 19 Dec 2012 19:47:57 +0100
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc:	Linux Containers <containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Serge Hallyn <serge@...lyn.com>,
	Gao feng <gaofeng@...fujitsu.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/11] pidns: Wait in zap_pid_ns_processes until
	pid_ns->nr_hashed == 1

On 11/16, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> @@ -216,22 +216,15 @@ void zap_pid_ns_processes(struct pid_namespace *pid_ns)
>
>  	/*
>  	 * sys_wait4() above can't reap the TASK_DEAD children.
> -	 * Make sure they all go away, see __unhash_process().
> +	 * Make sure they all go away, see free_pid().
>  	 */
>  	for (;;) {
> -		bool need_wait = false;
> -
> -		read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
> -		if (!list_empty(&current->children)) {
> -			__set_current_state(TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
> -			need_wait = true;
> -		}
> -		read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
> -
> -		if (!need_wait)
> +		set_current_state(TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
> +		if (pid_ns->nr_hashed == 1)
>  			break;
>  		schedule();
>  	}

I agree, the patch itself looks fine.

But, with all other changes I do not understand this part at all.

A task from the parent namespace can do setns + fork at any time
(until nr_hashed >= 0). So ->nr_hashed can be incremented again
after zap_pid_ns_processes() returns.

Or, we can sleep in TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE "forever" if this happens
after kill-them-all.

Could you explain why do we need to wait at all? I can be easily
wrong, but at first glance the original reason for this wait has
gone away?

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/