[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130716053140.GK4165@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2013 06:31:40 +0100
From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Ben Myers <bpm@....com>,
xfs@....sgi.com
Subject: Re: splice vs execve lockdep trace.
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 08:25:14PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> The "pipe -> cred_guard_mutex" lock chain is pretty direct, and can be
> clearly attributed to splicing into /proc. Now, whether that is a
> *good* idea or not is clearly debatable, and I do think that maybe we
> should just not splice to/from proc files, but that doesn't seem to be
> new, and I don't think it's necessarily *broken* per se, it's just
> that splicing into /proc seems somewhat unnecessary, and various proc
> files do end up taking locks that can be "interesting".
FWIW, we might attack that one - after all, we could have ->splice_write()
for that guy that would grab cred_guard_mutex, then call splice_from_pipe()
with actor that would map/do security_setprocattr/unmap... Said that,
considering what it does on write, it really does *not* want to deal with
partial writes, so...
--
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