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;
Date:   Thu, 18 Mar 2021 19:04:51 +0100
From:   Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To:     qianli zhao <zhaoqianligood@gmail.com>
Cc:     christian@brauner.io, axboe@kernel.dk,
        "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Peter Collingbourne <pcc@google.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Qianli Zhao <zhaoqianli@xiaomi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3] exit: trigger panic when global init has exited
Message-ID: <20210318180450.GA9977@redhat.com>
References: <1615985460-112867-1-git-send-email-zhaoqianligood@gmail.com>
 <20210317143805.GA5610@redhat.com>
 <CAPx_LQG=tj+kM14wS79tLPJbVjC+79OFDgfv6zai_sJ74CGeug@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAPx_LQG=tj+kM14wS79tLPJbVjC+79OFDgfv6zai_sJ74CGeug@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Precedence: bulk

On 03/18, qianli zhao wrote:
>
> Hi,Oleg
>
> Thank you for your reply.
>
> >> When init sub-threads running on different CPUs exit at the same time,
> >> zap_pid_ns_processe()->BUG() may be happened.
>
> > and why do you think your patch can't prevent this?
>
> > Sorry, I must have missed something. But it seems to me that you are trying
> > to fix the wrong problem. Yes, zap_pid_ns_processes() must not be called in
> > the root namespace, and this has nothing to do with CONFIG_PID_NS.
>
> Yes, i try to fix this exception by test SIGNAL_GROUP_EXIT and call
> panic before setting PF_EXITING to prevent zap_pid_ns_processes()
> being called when init do_exit().

Ah, I didn't notice your patch does atomic_dec_and_test(signal->live)
before exit_signals() which sets PF_EXITING. Thanks for correcting me.

So yes, I was wrong, your patch can prevent this. Although I'd like to
recheck if every do-something-if-group-dead action is correct in the
case we have a non-PF_EXITING thread...

But then I don't understand the SIGNAL_GROUP_EXIT check added by your
patch. Do we really need it if we want to avoid zap_pid_ns_processes()
when the global init exits?

> In addition, the patch also protects the init process state to
> successfully get usable init coredump.

Could you spell please?

Does this connect to SIGNAL_GROUP_EXIT check? Do you mean that you want
to panic earlier, before other init's sub-threads exit?

Thanks,

Oleg.