linux-kernel - [PATCH 0/1] usermodehelper: kill ____call_usermodehelper()->set_cpus_allowed

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]

Date:	Thu, 28 Nov 2013 20:33:30 +0100
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>, zhang.yi20@....com.cn,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
Subject: [PATCH 0/1] usermodehelper: kill
	____call_usermodehelper()->set_cpus_allowed_ptr()

On 11/28, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 04:00:55PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > And btw. Note ____call_usermodehelper()->set_cpus_allowed_ptr(cpu_all_mask).
> >
> > Even if we change the affinity of the "khelper" worker threads this
> > won't restrict the user-space helpers.
> >
> > I think this set_cpus_allowed_ptr() should die in any case?
>
> Yes. A while back someone proposed adding a magic cpumask to tweak in
> order to contain the usermode helpers.
>
> Obviously I thought that was a bad idea.

OK. let me send the trivial patch then, please take it or ack
for Andrew.

Assumung that you and Tejun agree with this change, of course.

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/