linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] CLONE_FD: Task exit notification via file descriptor

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: <20150316232949.GB31751@cloud>
Date:	Mon, 16 Mar 2015 16:29:49 -0700
From:	josh@...htriplett.org
To:	Thiago Macieira <thiago.macieira@...el.com>
Cc:	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] CLONE_FD: Task exit notification via file
 descriptor

On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 03:14:14PM -0700, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On Monday 16 March 2015 14:44:20 Kees Cook wrote:
> > >               O_CLOEXEC
> > >                      Set  the  close-on-exec  flag on the new file
> > >descriptor. See the description of the O_CLOEXEC flag in open(2)  for
> > >reasons why this may be useful.
> > 
> > This begs the question: what happens when all CLONE_FD fds for a
> > process are closed? Will the parent get SIGCHLD instead, will it
> > auto-reap, or will it be un-wait-able (I assume not this...)
> 
> Depends on CLONE_AUTOREAP. If it's on, then no one gets SIGCHLD, no one can 
> wait() on it and the process autoreaps itself.

Minor nit: CLONE_AUTOREAP makes the process autoreap and nobody can wait
on it, but if you pass SIGCHLD or some other exit signal to clone then
you'll still get that signal.

> If it's no active, then the old rules apply: parent gets SIGCHILD and can 
> wait(). If the parent exited first, then the child gets reparented to init, 
> which can do the wait().

Right.

> A child without CLONE_AUTOREAP should be wait()able. If it gets wait()ed 
> before the clonefd is read, the clonefd() will return a 0 read. If it gets 
> read before wait, then wait() reaps another child or returns -ECHILD. That's 
> no different than two threads doing simultaneous wait() on the same child.

Hrm?  That isn't the semantics we implemented; you'll *always* get an
exit notification via the clonefd if you have it open, with or without
autoreap and whether or not a wait has occurred yet.  And reading from
the clonefd does not serve as a wait; if you don't pass CLONE_AUTOREAP,
you'll still need to wait on the process.

- Josh Triplett
--
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/