lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Apr]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v4] ptrace: Fix fork event messages across pid namespaces
On 04/02, Matthew Dempsky wrote:
>
> When tracing a process in another pid namespace, it's important for
> fork event messages to contain the child's pid as seen from the
> tracer's pid namespace, not the parent's. Otherwise, the tracer won't
> be able to correlate the fork event with later SIGTRAP signals it
> receives from the child.
>
> We still risk a race condition if a ptracer from a different pid
> namespace attaches after we compute the pid_t value. However, sending
> a bogus fork event message in this unlikely scenario is still a vast
> improvement over the status quo where we always send bogus fork event
> messages to debuggers in a different pid namespace than the forking
> process.
>
> Signed-off-by: Matthew Dempsky <mdempsky@chromium.org>

Thanks,

Acked-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>



Some notes for potential future changes...

- I do not not see any potential user of ptrace_event_pid() outside
of fork.c, so perhaps this helper should not be exported.

In fact I wouldn't mind if you send v5 which moves it into fork.c ;)

- The usage of "trace" doesn't look very consistent after this patch...
OK, probably I'll try to cleanup this later.

- OTOH, calculating pid_nr in the namespace of ->parent can probably
go into another simple (exported) helper. do_notify_parent_*() and
exec_binprm() could use it, even they do not have the problem with
task_active_pid_ns(parent) == NULL. Not sure.

- I am thinking about another approach... Suppose that we change
ptrace_attach() to nullify ->ptrace_message, as we already discussed
this probably makes sense anyway.

Now (ignoring CLONE_VFORK to simplify the discussion), do_fork() can
do something like the following:

...

if (trace)
current->ptrace_message = calc_its_pid_in_parent_ns();

wake_up_new_task(p);

if (trace && current->ptrace_message && ptrace_event_enabled(trace))
ptrace_notify(...);

so that if we race with detach + attach we should likely see
->ptrace_message == 0 and report nothing as if the new debugger
attached after do_fork().

Not sure this is really possible (without additional complications),
and of course we still can't close the race completely.

But even if this can work and will not look too ugly, it would be
better to do this on top of your simple patch.


Matthew, I see other emails from you, will try to reply tomorrow.

Oleg.



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-04-04 01:41    [W:1.984 / U:0.368 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site