Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:6744:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id w4csp372644pxu; Wed, 14 Oct 2020 03:43:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwQZa6OwsSNI2h3FBb/y1AZYMpK4VW2H1WeZvFQcv9wk0xcW5lDK+Sj+t660bK1NXU1Boj/ X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:b091:: with SMTP id x17mr4544034ejy.178.1602672208446; Wed, 14 Oct 2020 03:43:28 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1602672208; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=Zjg02RMgqoK743OTIdRO1fuI90BWN9hQ8om0YbGhk0yF9OticuCRQ1cjwu/Qg5d4P0 K8KZ3Z357LtEmDWpK4/k8hdXY6w2JZgG1G1e+Mik+zWnSkF9u7mRlxMfOIKyVKZSmsqL DzOu8NJO6k+QYFVpsnm20zz8zy+6Op13zDTgwxUTCKMo3m9fSSVPNg8lP5UcPfgLak9r j0+N2wBXLqN20XeprH135OJCEKsfPzy8lXDhV3q2dUay0uwL3a4iyyoytZinPHNaomTq yQevHhesioejOYZuUa7QaEOqnPviT/N9JqI7LA/zYoq35sqWOchjuSbZwWeZVAtjyWU6 JolQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:mime-version:user-agent:message-id:in-reply-to :date:references:subject:cc:to:from:dkim-signature; bh=eL27MHQVYn4ElBKK1XQ1LogMRdkFND/1MAckF558KzI=; b=dEkSTn/9m6a00Yj+BjL0s4nc7za/suAG8qRQaNVNrqurhYxNtxMDGZs/v8zEsm3D+z qpgOzM0tGZlRNDOM5T+qQQCYUjIH5Bm5vCiA78Y16Jq+RsuvBc07IjIqYnv3JmBc6xHk rF+xWmxRLNpJj6lIWFHN7QDMHP2oxpkrkvIfyI+Hk6rk3yPX7MTyGHsryONhurfbh5ya 0i2aVsse9J81ugyI50kW9tqpCzSoXkN7P3NW/obZcpm7KOz2qX7uzMy9K9dp4bthk2vQ mbtNVjWOJ/ck4LyBtj+euJHF9Z23Si5KS2dIFr5FlB1JPg89gmvdkWj11NsEmazh7g+X 8yyg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b="Za+EAKP/"; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=redhat.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id q3si1958925edv.144.2020.10.14.03.43.06; Wed, 14 Oct 2020 03:43:28 -0700 (PDT) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b="Za+EAKP/"; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=redhat.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728686AbgJMWpI (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 13 Oct 2020 18:45:08 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([216.205.24.124]:49039 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727360AbgJMWpH (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Oct 2020 18:45:07 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1602629105; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=eL27MHQVYn4ElBKK1XQ1LogMRdkFND/1MAckF558KzI=; b=Za+EAKP/Imh9W8UvYkMmVs3ZpSUoRVZxMOExz1z0iz9+OMEksgoMcU0UVTSJtFH4Mr6GYr /lvfmwXeVID3+EwBcdvHTXu7IhoKGgCPAZ66RdC+5f/v5w8DOmDEn07mveVD+S8rDDnGtI MfwFu5wQO0Dshkf6R/ooyq0uHnHf5Gc= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-103-kP5hsnsGMxK64HuHe2ZLyA-1; Tue, 13 Oct 2020 18:45:04 -0400 X-MC-Unique: kP5hsnsGMxK64HuHe2ZLyA-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9B9C5107AD91; Tue, 13 Oct 2020 22:45:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (ovpn-112-103.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.112.103]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 28DD25D9CD; Tue, 13 Oct 2020 22:45:01 +0000 (UTC) From: Giuseppe Scrivano To: Christian Brauner Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, containers@lists.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] fs, close_range: add flag CLOSE_RANGE_CLOEXEC References: <20201013140609.2269319-1-gscrivan@redhat.com> <20201013140609.2269319-2-gscrivan@redhat.com> <20201013205427.clvqno24ctwxbuyv@wittgenstein> Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 00:45:00 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20201013205427.clvqno24ctwxbuyv@wittgenstein> (Christian Brauner's message of "Tue, 13 Oct 2020 22:54:27 +0200") Message-ID: <87imbdrbir.fsf@redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.14 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Christian Brauner writes: > On Tue, Oct 13, 2020 at 04:06:08PM +0200, Giuseppe Scrivano wrote: > > Hey Guiseppe, > > Thanks for the patch! > >> When the flag CLOSE_RANGE_CLOEXEC is set, close_range doesn't >> immediately close the files but it sets the close-on-exec bit. > > Hm, please expand on the use-cases a little here so people know where > and how this is useful. Keeping the rationale for a change in the commit > log is really important. > >> >> Signed-off-by: Giuseppe Scrivano >> --- > >> fs/file.c | 56 ++++++++++++++++++++++---------- >> include/uapi/linux/close_range.h | 3 ++ >> 2 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/fs/file.c b/fs/file.c >> index 21c0893f2f1d..ad4ebee41e09 100644 >> --- a/fs/file.c >> +++ b/fs/file.c >> @@ -672,6 +672,17 @@ int __close_fd(struct files_struct *files, unsigned fd) >> } >> EXPORT_SYMBOL(__close_fd); /* for ksys_close() */ >> >> +static unsigned int __get_max_fds(struct files_struct *cur_fds) >> +{ >> + unsigned int max_fds; >> + >> + rcu_read_lock(); >> + /* cap to last valid index into fdtable */ >> + max_fds = files_fdtable(cur_fds)->max_fds; >> + rcu_read_unlock(); >> + return max_fds; >> +} >> + >> /** >> * __close_range() - Close all file descriptors in a given range. >> * >> @@ -683,27 +694,23 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(__close_fd); /* for ksys_close() */ >> */ >> int __close_range(unsigned fd, unsigned max_fd, unsigned int flags) >> { >> - unsigned int cur_max; >> + unsigned int cur_max = UINT_MAX; >> struct task_struct *me = current; >> struct files_struct *cur_fds = me->files, *fds = NULL; >> >> - if (flags & ~CLOSE_RANGE_UNSHARE) >> + if (flags & ~(CLOSE_RANGE_UNSHARE | CLOSE_RANGE_CLOEXEC)) >> return -EINVAL; >> >> if (fd > max_fd) >> return -EINVAL; >> >> - rcu_read_lock(); >> - cur_max = files_fdtable(cur_fds)->max_fds; >> - rcu_read_unlock(); >> - >> - /* cap to last valid index into fdtable */ >> - cur_max--; >> - >> if (flags & CLOSE_RANGE_UNSHARE) { >> int ret; >> unsigned int max_unshare_fds = NR_OPEN_MAX; >> >> + /* cap to last valid index into fdtable */ >> + cur_max = __get_max_fds(cur_fds) - 1; >> + >> /* >> * If the requested range is greater than the current maximum, >> * we're closing everything so only copy all file descriptors >> @@ -724,16 +731,31 @@ int __close_range(unsigned fd, unsigned max_fd, unsigned int flags) >> swap(cur_fds, fds); >> } >> >> - max_fd = min(max_fd, cur_max); >> - while (fd <= max_fd) { >> - struct file *file; >> + if (flags & CLOSE_RANGE_CLOEXEC) { >> + struct fdtable *fdt; >> >> - file = pick_file(cur_fds, fd++); >> - if (!file) >> - continue; >> + spin_lock(&cur_fds->file_lock); >> + fdt = files_fdtable(cur_fds); >> + cur_max = fdt->max_fds - 1; >> + max_fd = min(max_fd, cur_max); >> + while (fd <= max_fd) >> + __set_close_on_exec(fd++, fdt); >> + spin_unlock(&cur_fds->file_lock); >> + } else { >> + /* Initialize cur_max if needed. */ >> + if (cur_max == UINT_MAX) >> + cur_max = __get_max_fds(cur_fds) - 1; > > The separation between how cur_fd is retrieved in the two branches makes > the code more difficult to follow imho. Unless there's a clear reason > why you've done it that way I would think that something like the patch > I appended below might be a little clearer and easier to maintain(?). Thanks for the review! I've opted for this version as in the flags=CLOSE_RANGE_CLOEXEC case we can read max_fds directly from the fds table and avoid doing it from the RCU critical section as well. I'll change it in favor of more readable code. Giuseppe