linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] exit/pid

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: <87fvd8gugc.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org>
Date:	Mon, 24 Nov 2014 15:27:47 -0600
From:	ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Aaron Tomlin <atomlin@...hat.com>,
	Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com>,
	Serge Hallyn <serge.hallyn@...ntu.com>,
	Sterling Alexander <stalexan@...hat.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] exit/pid_ns: comments + simple fix

Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> writes:

> Eric, Pavel, could you review 1/2 ? (documentation only). It is based on the
> code inspection, I didn't bother to verify that my understanding matches the
> reality ;)

Oleg you are being subtle, introducing some gratuitous changes and
slightly off base which makes this all very hard to review.

Eric


> On 11/20, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>>
>>
>> Probably this is not the last series... in particular it seems that we
>> have some problems with sys_setns() in this area, but I need to recheck.
>
> So far only the documentation fix. I'll write another email (hopefully with the
> patch), afaics at least setns() doesn't play well with PR_SET_CHILD_SUBREAPER.
>
> Contrary to what I thought zap_pid_ns_processes() looks fine, but it seems only
> by accident. Unless I am totally confused, wait for "nr_hashed == init_pids"
> could be removed after 0a01f2cc390e10633a "pidns: Make the pidns proc mount/
> umount logic obvious". However, now that setns() + fork() can inject a task
> into a child namespace, we need this code again for another reason.
>
> I _think_ we can actually remove it and simplify free_pid() as well, but lets
> discuss this later and fix the wrong/confusing documentation first.
>
> 2/2 looks "obviously correct", but I'll appreciate your review anyway.
>
> Oleg.
>
>  kernel/pid.c           |    7 +++----
>  kernel/pid_namespace.c |   23 +++++++++++++++++++----
>  2 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
--
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/