Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Please pull proc and exec work for 5.7-rc1
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>
Cc:     Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
        "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
        Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Alexey Gladkov <gladkov.alexey@gmail.com>
References: <CAHk-=whJttTNFQn1fMYp91LZ90iHE7B2THZ8NjQ7fBwmWX9k6w@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200428190836.GC29960@redhat.com>
 <CAHk-=wi03QRcUR1DfbEr+Pw-DAMENzY-FuRcGawtj9p597=p2w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAG48ez03ABTa-KbCtFHqB1hOT7dgAM96c3kiw-e80B+utSEwYw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHk-=wjTLnMuZmBO2foeHhsLAoUTpUi7oBVJ67F4XKB+tdEDbQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAG48ez3EQOvdbzu9aO-cEAJwF_=fJzn1Cg0LMs3ruc=5r1ie5w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHk-=whTgFbjGTP=CqMWs_LOkY7bWvLQGYKwKx86amdbMovAkw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAG48ez2-Nu2ALN6VEUZL-prtR_Kk8QYBHcnvuh0aU2e4zf37RA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHk-=wh=G47oD2F1CgOrvGFbEPh2ddMKLV4_wV_bs6S=98aZ5A@mail.gmail.com>
 <AM6PR03MB5170A6AA240D2E8F5E88B911E4AD0@AM6PR03MB5170.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAHk-=wguiKq8yf11WJjgSL4ADKZ5sLe_Qbd7vHEqAkTvZJ+d+Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHk-=wjUZLybZBJgOtD2gng=FS7USrbQQ1-tn5M+UP5DbCWdzw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAG48ez0FL3i4eGFYryOwG2nnS+JigfKYAVSV9ogVHjmjOWzsrA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHk-=wgcvn1_1kCkyourNCKeH+KrzSMRvc-ai_NLU4RGZT_XBg@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Bernd Edlinger <bernd.edlinger@hotmail.de>
Message-ID: <AM6PR03MB5170CCB8D9D41904066DAFD5E4AA0@AM6PR03MB5170.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Thu, 30 Apr 2020 15:39:23 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.6.1
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=wgcvn1_1kCkyourNCKeH+KrzSMRvc-ai_NLU4RGZT_XBg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-MessageSentRepresentingType: 1
Received: from [192.168.1.101] (84.57.60.225) by AM0PR07CA0027.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:208:ac::40) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2979.16 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 30 Apr 2020 13:39:24 +0000
X-Microsoft-Original-Message-ID: <9dc2a7f8-d7e0-a8fc-7457-610934a297c6@hotmail.de>
X-TMN:  [/OoXc6tcW1uHCxkH62kbzDtaVhiT99Xv]
X-MS-PublicTrafficType: Email
X-IncomingHeaderCount: 50
X-EOPAttributedMessage: 0
X-MS-Office365-Filtering-Correlation-Id: d2d9a64c-3920-40ba-f1f1-08d7ed0be5c3
X-MS-TrafficTypeDiagnostic: VE1EUR03HT154:
X-Microsoft-Antispam: BCL:0;
X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: mdhLTR8e6lEktJycq0A+DSr69begC3mdKmiue7AoMV/c/xEEv+r2CeEz6JAMkiGD3RRGXG74t5W2ok/sqzA+Lnw/6mi6D2gROj/qvcFNFzHiWmfd5xIxW0Op/J4njhV1DB+qssjbK6Gl11AIXycOSGgLHdNcDNbCtYTg8f/kHEZEsHym0WfWUGK/cQZhgbktrLvIHmHDbClKClWpKCfx+w==
X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:255.255.255.255;CTRY:;LANG:en;SCL:0;SRV:;IPV:NLI;SFV:NSPM;H:AM6PR03MB5170.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com;PTR:;CAT:NONE;SFTY:;SFS:;DIR:OUT;SFP:1901;
X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData: QL/J+onD810hzOolRk3oh3153GDPdz6L2bUMz8MZhajlFjaZvIyjsV01RDrbn+0s4G/2sdnDO10xS9DLggt663V3O43UeyH+WYdYUXBuJ7J7sXJ2fvOgQDxQ9THPW5Up6vlY8AZ5Q3HjEX9Hd65j2w==
X-OriginatorOrg: outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: d2d9a64c-3920-40ba-f1f1-08d7ed0be5c3
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 30 Apr 2020 13:39:25.5839
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 84df9e7f-e9f6-40af-b435-aaaaaaaaaaaa
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Internet
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-RMS-PersistedConsumerOrg: 00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: VE1EUR03HT154
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 4/30/20 4:16 AM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 5:00 PM Jann Horn <jannh@google.com> wrote:
>>
>> Wouldn't you end up livelocked in the scenario that currently deadlocks?
> 
> The test case that we already know is broken, and any fix will have to
> change anyway?
> 

The purpose of the test case was only to test the behaviour of my
later patch.  The test case _must_ be adjusted to the follow-up
patch, I have no problem with that.  Anybody may change the test case
when we know how to fix the API.  I did just not anticipate that Eric
would only apply 14 of 16 patches = 87.5% of the patch series. Now that
causes some tension, but it is not really a problem IMHO.

> Let's just say that I don't care in the least.
> 
> But Bernd's patch as-is breaks a test-case that currently *works*,
> namely something as simple as
> 
>   echo xyz > /proc/<pid>/attr/something
> 

Excuse me, but what in my /proc folder there is no attr/something
is there a procfs equivalent of pthread_attach ?

What exactly is "attr/something" ?

> and honestly, breaking something that _works_ and may be used in
> reality, in orderf to make a known buggy user testcase work?
> 
> Because no, "write()" returning -EAGAIN isn't ok.
> 

write can return -EAGAIN if the file is non-blocking, it is
never the case for a disk file, but for a NFS that is not at all
clear, depends on a mount option, and once I had a deadlock in
one of my test systems after OOM-stress, but I never was able
to reproduce, the umount deadlocked, then I was not able to
reboot, could be an alpha-particle of course, who knows...


Hmmm.. maybe a stupid idea:

We could keep the old deadlock-capable API,
and add a new _flag_ somewhere to the PTHREAD_ATTACH call,
that _enables_ the non-blocking behavior, how about that.


Thanks
Bernd.

>             Linus
>