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;
From:   ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To:     Olivier Langlois <olivier@trillion01.com>
Cc:     Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
        io-uring <io-uring@vger.kernel.org>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
        "Pavel Begunkov\>" <asml.silence@gmail.com>
References: <CAHk-=wjC7GmCHTkoz2_CkgSc_Cgy19qwSQgJGXz+v2f=KT3UOw@mail.gmail.com>
        <198e912402486f66214146d4eabad8cb3f010a8e.camel@trillion01.com>
        <87eeda7nqe.fsf@disp2133>
        <b8434a8987672ab16f9fb755c1fc4d51e0f4004a.camel@trillion01.com>
        <87pmwt6biw.fsf@disp2133> <87czst5yxh.fsf_-_@disp2133>
        <CAHk-=wiax83WoS0p5nWvPhU_O+hcjXwv6q3DXV8Ejb62BfynhQ@mail.gmail.com>
        <87y2bh4jg5.fsf@disp2133>
        <CAHk-=wjPiEaXjUp6PTcLZFjT8RrYX+ExtD-RY3NjFWDN7mKLbw@mail.gmail.com>
        <87sg1p4h0g.fsf_-_@disp2133> <20210614141032.GA13677@redhat.com>
        <87pmwmn5m0.fsf@disp2133>
        <4163ed48afbcb1c288b366fe2745205cd66bea3d.camel@trillion01.com>
Date:   Wed, 16 Jun 2021 15:00:12 -0500
In-Reply-To: <4163ed48afbcb1c288b366fe2745205cd66bea3d.camel@trillion01.com>
        (Olivier Langlois's message of "Wed, 16 Jun 2021 15:23:14 -0400")
Message-ID: <87v96dd1gz.fsf@disp2133>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Subject: Re: [PATCH] coredump: Limit what can interrupt coredumps
Precedence: bulk

Olivier Langlois <olivier@trillion01.com> writes:

> I redid my test but this time instead of dumping directly into a file,
> I did let the coredump be piped to the systemd coredump module and the
> coredump generation isn't working as expected when piping.
>
> So your code review conclusions are correct.

Thank you for confirming that.

Do you know how your test program is using io_uring?

I have been trying to put the pieces together on what io_uring is doing
that stops the coredump.  The fact that it takes a little while before
it kills the coredump is a little puzzling.  The code looks like all of
the io_uring operations should have been canceled before the coredump
starts.

Thanks,
Eric