[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140115192816.GA19396@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 20:28:16 +0100
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Nicolas Schichan <nschichan@...ebox.fr>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
James Morris <james.l.morris@...cle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, holt@....com,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] sys, seccomp: add PR_SECCOMP_EXT and
SECCOMP_EXT_ACT_TSYNC
On 01/15, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> I think the
> locking is seriously broken in this series.
And imho seccomp_sync_threads() should fail "safely".
IOW, I think it should do while_each_thread() twice. The first
iteration should just check SECCOMP_MODE_FILTER/is_ancestor()
and fail if necessary. The 2nd one should change other threads.
Btw, it seems that is_ancestor() doesn't need the NULL check,
it is not called if SECCOMP_MODE_DISABLED ?
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