Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 24 Jul 2020 15:40:28 +0100 | From | Catalin Marinas <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v5 0/6] arm64: add the time namespace support |
| |
On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 03:30:39PM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote: > On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 10:41:40AM -0700, Andrei Vagin wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 07:15:06PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > > On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 06:57:43PM -0700, Andrei Vagin wrote: > > > > On Sat, Jul 04, 2020 at 11:40:55PM -0700, Andrei Vagin wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 01:33:15AM -0700, Andrei Vagin wrote: > > > > > > Allocate the time namespace page among VVAR pages and add the logic > > > > > > to handle faults on VVAR properly. > > > > > > > > > > > > If a task belongs to a time namespace then the VVAR page which contains > > > > > > the system wide VDSO data is replaced with a namespace specific page > > > > > > which has the same layout as the VVAR page. That page has vdso_data->seq > > > > > > set to 1 to enforce the slow path and vdso_data->clock_mode set to > > > > > > VCLOCK_TIMENS to enforce the time namespace handling path. > > > > > > > > > > > > The extra check in the case that vdso_data->seq is odd, e.g. a concurrent > > > > > > update of the VDSO data is in progress, is not really affecting regular > > > > > > tasks which are not part of a time namespace as the task is spin waiting > > > > > > for the update to finish and vdso_data->seq to become even again. > > > > > > > > > > > > If a time namespace task hits that code path, it invokes the corresponding > > > > > > time getter function which retrieves the real VVAR page, reads host time > > > > > > and then adds the offset for the requested clock which is stored in the > > > > > > special VVAR page. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > v2: Code cleanups suggested by Vincenzo. > > > > > > v3: add a comment in __arch_get_timens_vdso_data. > > > > > > v4: - fix an issue reported by the lkp robot. > > > > > > - vvar has the same size with/without CONFIG_TIME_NAMESPACE, but the > > > > > > timens page isn't allocated on !CONFIG_TIME_NAMESPACE. This > > > > > > simplifies criu/vdso migration between different kernel configs. > > > > > > v5: - Code cleanups suggested by Mark Rutland. > > > > > > - In vdso_join_timens, mmap_write_lock is downgraded to > > > > > > mmap_read_lock. The VMA list isn't changed there, zap_page_range > > > > > > doesn't require mmap_write_lock. > > > > > > > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@arm.com> > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Dmitry Safonov <dima@arista.com> > > > > > > > > > > Hello Will and Catalin, > > > > > > > > > > Have you had a chance to look at this patch set? I think it is ready to be > > > > > merged. Let me know if you have any questions. > > > > > > > > *friendly ping* > > > > > > > > If I am doing something wrong, let me know. > > > > > > Not really, just haven't got around to looking into it. Mark Rutland > > > raised a concern (in private) about the safety of multithreaded apps > > > but I think you already replied that timens_install() checks for this > > > already [1]. > > > > > > Maybe a similar atomicity issue to the one raised by Mark but for > > > single-threaded processes: the thread is executing vdso code, gets > > > interrupted and a signal handler invokes setns(). Would resuming the > > > execution in the vdso code on sigreturn cause any issues? > > > > It will not cause any issues in the kernel. In the userspace, > > clock_gettime() can return a clock value with an inconsistent offset, if > > a process switches between two non-root namespaces. And it can triggers > > SIGSEGV if it switches from a non-root to the root time namespace, > > because a time namespace isn't mapped in the root time namespace. > > > > I don't think that we need to handle this case in the kernel. Users > > must understand what they are doing and have to write code so that avoid > > these sort of situations. In general, I would say that in most cases it > > is a bad idea to call setns from a signal handler. > > I would argue that calling any function not in the list of > man 7 signal-safety > without checking the kernel implementation is "you get to keep the > pieces territory". There's a whole range of syscalls that are not safe > in signal handlers and we don't have any special precautions for them so > I'm not sure we'd need one for setns(). But maybe I'm missing the bigger > picture here.
Good point (I don't read man pages very often ;)). Thanks for clarifying.
-- Catalin
| |