linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 1/7] cgroup/cpuset: Don't let child cpusets restrict parent in default hierarchy

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: <20211215122336.GB25459@blackbody.suse.cz>
Date:   Wed, 15 Dec 2021 13:23:36 +0100
From:   Michal Koutný <mkoutny@...e.com>
To:     Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:     Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>,
        Zefan Li <lizefan.x@...edance.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>, Phil Auld <pauld@...hat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
        Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
        Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 1/7] cgroup/cpuset: Don't let child cpusets restrict
 parent in default hierarchy

On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 10:41:23AM -1000, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote:
> > To address this issue, the check is now removed for the default hierarchy
> > to free parent cpusets from being restricted by child cpusets. The
> > check will still apply for legacy hierarchy.

I'm trying to find whether something in update_cpumasks_hier() ensures
the constraint is checkd on the legacy hierarchy but it seems to me this
baby was thrown out with the bathwater. How is the legacy check still
applied?

> Applied to cgroup/for-5.17.

It comes out a bit more complex if I want to achieve both variants in
the below followup:

diff --git a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
index 0dd7d853ed17..8b6e06f504f6 100644
--- a/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
+++ b/kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c
@@ -590,6 +590,35 @@ static inline void free_cpuset(struct cpuset *cs)
 	kfree(cs);
 }
 
+/*
+ * validate_change_legacy() - Validate conditions specific to legacy (v1)
+ *                            behavior.
+ */
+static int validate_change_legacy(struct cpuset *cur, struct cpuset *trial)
+{
+	struct cgroup_subsys_state *css;
+	struct cpuset *c, *par;
+	int ret;
+
+	WARN_ON_ONCE(!rcu_read_lock_held());
+
+	/* Each of our child cpusets must be a subset of us */
+	ret = -EBUSY;
+	cpuset_for_each_child(c, css, cur)
+		if (!is_cpuset_subset(c, trial))
+			goto out;
+
+	/* On legacy hierarchy, we must be a subset of our parent cpuset. */
+	ret = -EACCES;
+	par = parent_cs(cur);
+	if (par && !is_cpuset_subset(trial, par))
+		goto out;
+
+	ret = 0;
+out:
+	return ret;
+}
+
 /*
  * validate_change() - Used to validate that any proposed cpuset change
  *		       follows the structural rules for cpusets.
@@ -614,20 +643,21 @@ static int validate_change(struct cpuset *cur, struct cpuset *trial)
 {
 	struct cgroup_subsys_state *css;
 	struct cpuset *c, *par;
-	int ret;
-
-	/* The checks don't apply to root cpuset */
-	if (cur == &top_cpuset)
-		return 0;
+	int ret = 0;
 
 	rcu_read_lock();
-	par = parent_cs(cur);
 
-	/* On legacy hierarchy, we must be a subset of our parent cpuset. */
-	ret = -EACCES;
-	if (!is_in_v2_mode() && !is_cpuset_subset(trial, par))
+	ret = validate_change_legacy(cur, trial);
+	if (ret)
+		goto out;
+
+	/* Remaining checks don't apply to root cpuset */
+	ret = 0;
+	if (cur == &top_cpuset)
 		goto out;
 
+	par = parent_cs(cur);
+
 	/*
 	 * If either I or some sibling (!= me) is exclusive, we can't
 	 * overlap
@@ -1175,9 +1205,7 @@ enum subparts_cmd {
  *
  * Because of the implicit cpu exclusive nature of a partition root,
  * cpumask changes that violates the cpu exclusivity rule will not be
- * permitted when checked by validate_change(). The validate_change()
- * function will also prevent any changes to the cpu list if it is not
- * a superset of children's cpu lists.
+ * permitted when checked by validate_change().
  */
 static int update_parent_subparts_cpumask(struct cpuset *cpuset, int cmd,
 					  struct cpumask *newmask,