lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Jan]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] binfmt_elf: core dump masking support
On Mon 2007-01-22 11:29:40, Kawai, Hidehiro wrote:
> Hi Pavel,
>
> >>>>The /proc/<pid>/ approach doesn't have these demerits, and it
> >>>>has an advantage that users can change the bitmask of any process
> >>>>at anytime.
> >>>
> >>>Well... not sure if it is advantage.
> >>
> >>For example, consider the following case:
> >> a process forks many children and system administrator wants to
> >> allow only one of these processes to dump shared memory.
> >>
> >>This is accomplished as follows:
> >>
> >> $ echo 1 > /proc/self/coremask
> >> $ ./some_program
> >> (fork children)
> >> $ echo 0 > /proc/<a child's pid>/coremask
> >>
> >>With the /proc/<pid>/ interface, we don't need to modify the
> >>user program. In contrast, with the ulimit or setrlimit interface,
> >>the administrator can't do it without modifying the user program
> >>to call setrlimit. This will not be preferred.
> >
> > Yep, otoh process coremask setting can change while it is running,
> > that is not expected. Hmm, it can also change while it is dumping
> > core, are you sure it is not racy?
>
> Good point, thanks. I never thought of that.
> We can change the coremask setting while dumping the process's
> memory, and it is problematic.
>
> maydump() function which decides a given VMA may be dumped or not
> is invoked twice per VMAs. One is at the time of writing a program
> header for a VMA, another is at the time of writing its contents.
> If the coremask setting differs between the two, the program
> header will point wrong place in the core file as its contents.
>
>
> > (run echo 1 > coremask, echo 0 > coremask in a loop while dumping
> > core. Do you have enough locking to make it work as expected?)
>
> Currently, any lock isn't acquired. But I think the kernel only
> have to preserve the coremask setting in a local variable at the
> begining of core dumping. I'm going to do this in the next version.

No, I do not think that is enough. At minimum, you'd need atomic_t
variable. But I'd recomend against it. Playing with locking is tricky.

Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-01-22 12:09    [W:0.077 / U:2.408 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site