linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/1] devpts: use dynamic

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:   Wed, 16 Aug 2017 14:45:54 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...onical.com>
Cc:     Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
        Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] devpts: use dynamic_dname() to generate proc name

On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 2:37 PM, Christian Brauner
<christian.brauner@...onical.com> wrote:
>> And Christian, if you can beat on this, that would be good.
>
> Yes, I can pound on this nicely with liblxc. We have patch
> ( https://github.com/lxc/lxc/pull/1728 ) up for review that
> allocates pty fds from private devpts mounts in different namespaces
> and sends those fds around between different namespaces.

Good. Testing that this works with different pts filesystems in
different places is exactly the kind of thing I'd like to see. I only
tested with my single pts filesystem that is mounted at /dev/pts, and
making sure it works when there are multiple mounts and in different
places is exactly the kind of testing this should get.

For example, if some namespace has it's pty's in _its_ /dev/pts/
hierarchy, and you then pass such a pty to somebody else that either
doesn't have that pts mount at all, or has it visible somewhere
entirely different, the result should now be something else than that
"/dev/pts/n" path.

But it would be good to just test this in general too, and make sure I
didn't screw up some reference count or something. The patch *looks*
obviously correct, but ...

               Linus