Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754751AbZF2CrD (ORCPT ); Sun, 28 Jun 2009 22:47:03 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751887AbZF2Cqx (ORCPT ); Sun, 28 Jun 2009 22:46:53 -0400 Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:36089 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751744AbZF2Cqw (ORCPT ); Sun, 28 Jun 2009 22:46:52 -0400 Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 01:32:00 +0200 From: Oleg Nesterov To: Neil Horman Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, earl_chew@agilent.com, Alan Cox , Andi Kleen Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] exec: Make do_coredump more robust and safer when using pipes in core_pattern (v3) Message-ID: <20090628233200.GA26669@redhat.com> References: <20090622172818.GB14673@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> <20090625163050.d6a71a13.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20090629003514.GC2479@localhost.localdomain> <20090628222455.GA21475@redhat.com> <20090629023621.GA4289@localhost.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090629023621.GA4289@localhost.localdomain> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1607 Lines: 37 On 06/28, Neil Horman wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 12:24:55AM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > > > Perhaps this sysctl should be added in a separate patch? This patch mixes > > differents things imho. > > > No, I disagree. If we're going to have a sysctl, It should be added in this > patch. I agree that since these processes run as root, we can have all sort of > bad things happen. But I think theres an advantage to being able to limit the > damage that a core_pattern process can do if it never exits. Yes, but why it should be added in this patch? > > But in fact I don't really understand why do we need the new sysctl. Yes, > > if the collecting process never exits, the coredumping thread can't be reaped. > > But this process runs as root, it can do other bad things. And let's suppose > > it just does nothing, say sleeps forever, and do not read the data from pipe. > > In that case, regardless of any sysctls, ->core_dump() never finishes too. > > > Not always true, in the event that the core file is smaller than the pipe size. sure, > But regardless, if ->core_dump never returns due to the aforementioned > situation, the sysctl provides the ability to mitigate the damange that can do, > since the dump count is held while ->core_dump is called. Yes, I misread the sysctl code. Perhaps another reason to split this patch ;) Oleg. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/