[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171130003341.GA14339@marcos-builder>
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2017 22:33:43 -0200
From: Marcos Paulo de Souza <marcos.souza.org@...il.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
Hari Bathini <hbathini@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] fork.c: Move check of clone NEWIPC and SYSVSEM to
copy_process
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 11:04:06AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> CC Eric
>
> On Sun 26-11-17 14:06:52, Marcos Paulo de Souza wrote:
> > Currently this check for CLONE_NEWIPC with CLONE_SYSVSEM is done inside
> > copy_namespaces, resulting in a handful of error paths being executed if
> > these flags were used together. So, move this check to the beginning of
> > copy_process, exiting earlier if the condition is true.
> >
> > This move is safe because copy_namespaces is called just from
> > copy_process function.
This change is introduced right below the point where clone_flags is already
checking for inconsistencies in namespace flags[1], and returns EINVAL when
conflicting flags are informed together.
In this case, it's easier to return early when conflicting flags are informed at
the beginning, so moving a namespace check to where namespaces are already being
sanitized makes sense. If the code stays where it is now, and a user calls clone
syscalls informing CLONE_NEWIPC | CLONE_SYSVSEM, the code will need to undo a
lot of work before returning the same EINVAL[2].
[1] https://elixir.free-electrons.com/linux/latest/source/kernel/fork.c#L1552
[2] https://elixir.free-electrons.com/linux/latest/source/kernel/fork.c#L1953
>
> I am not familiar with the code all that much but the justification is
> not clear to me. Thesea re namespace related flags so why should we pull
> them out of copy_namespaces. I do not see any simplifications in the
> error code paths or something like that.
>
> > Signed-off-by: Marcos Paulo de Souza <marcos.souza.org@...il.com>
> > ---
> > kernel/fork.c | 11 +++++++++++
> > kernel/nsproxy.c | 11 -----------
> > 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/fork.c b/kernel/fork.c
> > index 2113e252cb9d..691f9ba135fc 100644
> > --- a/kernel/fork.c
> > +++ b/kernel/fork.c
> > @@ -1600,6 +1600,17 @@ static __latent_entropy struct task_struct *copy_process(
> > return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
> >
> > /*
> > + * CLONE_NEWIPC must detach from the undolist: after switching
> > + * to a new ipc namespace, the semaphore arrays from the old
> > + * namespace are unreachable. In clone parlance, CLONE_SYSVSEM
> > + * means share undolist with parent, so we must forbid using
> > + * it along with CLONE_NEWIPC.
> > + */
> > + if ((clone_flags & (CLONE_NEWIPC | CLONE_SYSVSEM)) ==
> > + (CLONE_NEWIPC | CLONE_SYSVSEM))
> > + return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
> > +
> > + /*
> > * Thread groups must share signals as well, and detached threads
> > * can only be started up within the thread group.
> > */
> > diff --git a/kernel/nsproxy.c b/kernel/nsproxy.c
> > index f6c5d330059a..30882727dff5 100644
> > --- a/kernel/nsproxy.c
> > +++ b/kernel/nsproxy.c
> > @@ -151,17 +151,6 @@ int copy_namespaces(unsigned long flags, struct task_struct *tsk)
> > if (!ns_capable(user_ns, CAP_SYS_ADMIN))
> > return -EPERM;
> >
> > - /*
> > - * CLONE_NEWIPC must detach from the undolist: after switching
> > - * to a new ipc namespace, the semaphore arrays from the old
> > - * namespace are unreachable. In clone parlance, CLONE_SYSVSEM
> > - * means share undolist with parent, so we must forbid using
> > - * it along with CLONE_NEWIPC.
> > - */
> > - if ((flags & (CLONE_NEWIPC | CLONE_SYSVSEM)) ==
> > - (CLONE_NEWIPC | CLONE_SYSVSEM))
> > - return -EINVAL;
> > -
> > new_ns = create_new_namespaces(flags, tsk, user_ns, tsk->fs);
> > if (IS_ERR(new_ns))
> > return PTR_ERR(new_ns);
> > --
> > 2.13.6
> >
>
> --
> Michal Hocko
> SUSE Labs
--
Thanks,
Marcos
Powered by blists - more mailing lists