linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] fuse: do not generate interrupt requests for fatal signals

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: <92427273-edeb-42b2-8f3c-5256d5a4b056@fastmail.fm>
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2024 19:38:23 +0200
From: Bernd Schubert <bernd.schubert@...tmail.fm>
To: Haifeng Xu <haifeng.xu@...pee.com>, Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] fuse: do not generate interrupt requests for fatal signals

On 6/15/24 14:19, Haifeng Xu wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2024/6/14 18:01, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
>> On Thu, 13 Jun 2024 at 12:44, Haifeng Xu <haifeng.xu@...pee.com> wrote:
>>
>>> So why the client doesn't get woken up?
>>
>> Need to find out what the server (lxcfs) is doing.  Can you do a
>> strace of lxcfs to see the communication on the fuse device?
> 
> ok, I use strace to track one of the server threads. The output
> can be seen in attachment. 
> 
> FD: 6 DIR  /run/lxcfs/controllers/sys/fs/cgroup/
> FD: 7 CHR  /dev/fuse

I had missed that there is an strace output. 
Would it be possible that you describe your issue with all 
details you have? There is a timeout patch now and it would probably solve your issue

https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240813232241.2369855-1-joannelkoong@gmail.com/T/

but Miklos is asking for a motivation. From point of view that fuse server could 
abort requests itself Miklos is absolutely right (the product I'm actually working
on has that...). And one could even add a timeout mechanism to libfuse.
But question to understand your main issue and if there would be a request 
timeout needed.

In general, it would be helpful if you could provide everything you know, already
with the initial patch.
Later on you posted that you use LXCFS, but personally I don't know anything about
it. So it would be good to describe where that actually runs and what you do to trigger
the issue, etc. Details...

Thanks,
Bernd