On 11/11, Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote:
>
> Subject: [PATCH 3/3] sig: Handle pid namespace crossing when sending signals.
> I add a struct pid sender parameter to __group_send_sig_info, as that is
> the only function called with si_pid != task_tgid_vnr(current). So we can
> correctly handle the sending of a signal to the parent of an arbitrary
> task.
Sukadev, Eric, I am sorry but... and it is very possible I missed something
but... You can't even imagine how I hate these complications ;)
Could you please take another look at the patch I sent
http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=122634217518183
? It is very simple (but yes, hackish). See also my comment about
in_interrupt() check...
(btw, your another email has a good point, we can't use ->nsproxy
like that patch does).
> --- a/ipc/mqueue.c
> +++ b/ipc/mqueue.c
> @@ -506,7 +506,7 @@ static void __do_notify(struct mqueue_inode_info *info)
> sig_i.si_errno = 0;
> sig_i.si_code = SI_MESGQ;
> sig_i.si_value = info->notify.sigev_value;
> - sig_i.si_pid = task_tgid_vnr(current);
> + sig_i.si_pid = 0; /* Uses default current tgid */
> sig_i.si_uid = current->uid;
Yes __do_notify() (and other pathes I am not aware of) needs attention
too, but I'd suggest a separate patch...
And I personally like the idea to factor out these ".si_pid = current->pid"
but in a separate patch?
> +static void set_sigqueue_pid(struct sigqueue *q, struct task_struct *t,
> + struct pid *sender)
> +{
> + struct pid_namespace *ns;
> +
> + /* Set si_pid to the pid number of sender in the pid namespace of
> + * our destination task for all siginfo types that support it.
> + */
> + switch(q->info.si_code & __SI_MASK) {
> + /* siginfo without si_pid */
> + case __SI_TIMER:
> + case __SI_POLL:
> + case __SI_FAULT:
> + break;
> + /* siginfo with si_pid */
> + case __SI_KILL:
> + case __SI_CHLD:
> + case __SI_RT:
> + case __SI_MESGQ:
> + default:
> + /* si_pid for SI_KERNEL is always 0 */
> + if (q->info.si_code == SI_KERNEL || in_interrupt())
> + break;
> + /* Is current not the sending task? */
> + if (!sender)
> + sender = task_tgid(current);
> + ns = task_active_pid_ns(t);
> + q->info.si_pid = pid_nr_ns(sender, ns);
> + break;
> + }
> +}
Why, why? Just: if from parent ns - clear .si_pid. No?
Oleg.
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
