Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-59222-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:4601:e00::3;
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2024 11:28:17 +0100
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
	Tycho Andersen <tycho@tycho.pizza>, linux-api@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pidfd: change pidfd_send_signal() to respect PIDFD_THREAD
Message-ID: <20240209102816.GA3282@redhat.com>
References: <20240207114549.GA12697@redhat.com>
 <20240208-fragt-prospekt-7866333b15f0@brauner>
 <20240208135344.GD19801@redhat.com>
 <20240208143407.GF19801@redhat.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20240208143407.GF19801@redhat.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)

On 02/08, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> Is prepare_kill_siginfo() correct when we send a signal to the child
> pid namespace? si_pid = task_tgid_vnr(current) doesn't look right

Yes, but iiuc send_signal_locked() should fixup si_pid/si_uid, so it
is not buggy.

> And why do we need it at all? Can't sys_kill() and pidfd_send_signal()
> just use SEND_SIG_NOINFO?

Probably yes. And even do_tkill() can use SEND_SIG_NOINFO if we change
__send_signal_locked() to check the type before ".si_code = SI_USER".
but then TP_STORE_SIGINFO() needs some changes...

I'll try to do this later, I do not want to mix this change with the
PIDFD_THREAD changes.

Oleg.