Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756822AbZIDMwK (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Sep 2009 08:52:10 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756538AbZIDMwK (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Sep 2009 08:52:10 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:60917 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756773AbZIDMwJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Sep 2009 08:52:09 -0400 Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2009 14:46:04 +0200 From: Oleg Nesterov To: David Howells Cc: Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds , James Morris , Roland McGrath , Tom Horsley , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] exec: do not sleep in TASK_TRACED under ->cred_guard_mutex Message-ID: <20090904124604.GA6248@redhat.com> References: <20090903160514.GA23646@redhat.com> <29983.1252053547@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <29983.1252053547@redhat.com> 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: 1479 Lines: 38 On 09/04, David Howells wrote: > > Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > > But I strongly believe we should blame another patch > > > > "CRED: Make execve() take advantage of copy-on-write credentials" > > a6f76f23d297f70e2a6b3ec607f7aeeea9e37e8d > > > > The tracee must not sleep in TASK_TRACED holding this mutex (it was named > > cred_exec_mutex). Even if we remove ->cred_guard_mutex from mm_for_maps() > > and proc_pid_attr_write(), another task doing PTRACE_ATTACH should not > > hang until it is killed or the tracee resumes. (Argh. Sorry David, the changelog should have mentioned tracehook_report_exec() more explicitely). So, David, do you agree with this patch? Do you think it can go to 2.6.31 ? > Btw, should mm_for_maps() use mutex_lock_interruptible()? There doesn't seem > any point making it non-interruptible (except for kill signals) - unless that > would muck up seqfile handling. Perhaps, but we should change m_start() first, it should check IS_ERR() instead of mm != NULL. Afaics, vfs_read()->seq_read() path will return ERESTART... correctly. I am not sure would be right though, short reads can confuse user space. And this can't solve the problem, this only helps to react to signals. 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/