Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Wed, 7 Dec 2022 06:34:45 -0800
From:   "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
To:     Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc:     "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
        Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Neeraj Upadhyay <quic_neeraju@quicinc.com>,
        Pengfei Xu <pengfei.xu@intel.com>,
        Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
        Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>, rcu@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] rcu-tasks: Fix synchronize_rcu_tasks() VS
 zap_pid_ns_processes()
Message-ID: <20221207143445.GA4001@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1>
Reply-To: paulmck@kernel.org
References: <20221125135500.1653800-1-frederic@kernel.org>
 <20221125135500.1653800-4-frederic@kernel.org>
 <871qpkqof8.fsf@email.froward.int.ebiederm.org>
 <20221206164927.GD3866@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20221206164927.GD3866@redhat.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Dec 06, 2022 at 05:49:28PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 11/30, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> >
> > 2) I keep thinking zap_pid_ns_processes() should be changed so that
> >    after it sends SIGKILL to all of the relevant processes to not wait,
> 
> At least I think it should not wait for the tasks injected into this ns.
> 
> Because this looks like a kernel bug even if we forget about this deadlock.
> 
> Say we create a task P using clone(CLONE_NEWPID), then inject a task T into
> P's pid-namespace via setns/fork. This make the process P "unkillable", it
> will hang in zap_pid_ns_processes() "forever" until T->parent reaps a zombie
> task T killed by P.

Given that this is not the first time that Tasks Trace RCU has been
involved in a deadlock involving this exit path, I could certainly get
behind this approach.  ;-)

							Thanx, Paul