linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHSET 0/2] PF_IO

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: <CAHk-=wh3DCgezr5RKQ4Mqffoj-F4i47rp85Q4MSFRNhrr8tg3w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 20 Mar 2021 12:18:15 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, io-uring <io-uring@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHSET 0/2] PF_IO_WORKER signal tweaks

On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 10:51 AM Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> Alternatively, make it not use
> CLONE_SIGHAND|CLONE_THREAD at all, but that would make it
> unnecessarily allocate its own signal state, so that's "cleaner" but
> not great either.

Thinking some more about that, it would be problematic for things like
the resource counters too. They'd be much better shared.

Not adding it to the thread list etc might be clever, but feels a bit too scary.

So on the whole I think Jens' minor patches to just not have IO helper
threads accept signals are probably the right thing to do.

           Linus