linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] pidfd: implement PIDFD_THREAD flag for pidfd

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: <20240131141957.GB2609@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2024 15:19:58 +0100
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>
Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	Tycho Andersen <tycho@...ho.pizza>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] pidfd: implement PIDFD_THREAD flag for
 pidfd_open()

On 01/31, Christian Brauner wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 02:26:02PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > With this flag:
> >
> > 	- pidfd_open() doesn't require that the target task must be
> > 	  a thread-group leader
> >
> > 	- pidfd_poll() succeeds when the task exits and becomes a
> > 	  zombie (iow, passes exit_notify()), even if it is a leader
> > 	  and thread-group is not empty.
> >
> > 	  This means that the behaviour of pidfd_poll(PIDFD_THREAD,
> > 	  pid-of-group-leader) is not well defined if it races with
> > 	  exec() from its sub-thread; pidfd_poll() can succeed or not
> > 	  depending on whether pidfd_task_exited() is called before
> > 	  or after exchange_tids().
>
> I think that we can live with that for now. If it doesn't hinder Tycho's
> use-case it's fine.

OK, good.

> (I often wish that we could report custom data from poll similar to
> kqueue on bsd then we could attach file specific information to the
> notification. That would enable userspace to handle this the way they
> want.)

Or at least perhaps we can change do_notify_pidfd() to use the keyed
wakeups... I'll try to take a look later.

> > thread_group_exited() is no longer used, perhaps it can die.
>
> Feel free to add a patch for that on top of it.

Yes, will do.

Oleg.