[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <m1eeg9bxyi.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org>
Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2021 11:18:29 -0500
From: ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc: io-uring@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, oleg@...hat.com,
Stefan Metzmacher <metze@...ba.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] signal: don't allow sending any signals to PF_IO_WORKER threads
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk> writes:
> They don't take signals individually, and even if they share signals with
> the parent task, don't allow them to be delivered through the worker
> thread.
This is silly I know, but why do we care?
The creds should be reasonably in-sync with the rest of the threads.
There are other threads that will receive the signal, especially when
you worry about group_send_sig_info. Which signal sending code paths
are actually a problem.
> Reported-by: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@...ba.org>
> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
> ---
> kernel/signal.c | 3 +++
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/signal.c b/kernel/signal.c
> index ba4d1ef39a9e..730ecd3d6faf 100644
> --- a/kernel/signal.c
> +++ b/kernel/signal.c
> @@ -833,6 +833,9 @@ static int check_kill_permission(int sig, struct kernel_siginfo *info,
>
> if (!valid_signal(sig))
> return -EINVAL;
> + /* PF_IO_WORKER threads don't take any signals */
> + if (t->flags & PF_IO_WORKER)
> + return -EPERM;
>
> if (!si_fromuser(info))
> return 0;
Powered by blists - more mailing lists