Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 21 Dec 2017 09:25:35 -0500 | From | Dave Jones <> | Subject | Re: proc_flush_task oops |
| |
On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 12:38:12PM +0200, Alexey Dobriyan wrote: > On 12/21/17, Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com> wrote: > > I have stared at this code, and written some test programs and I can't > > see what is going on. alloc_pid by design and in implementation (as far > > as I can see) is always single threaded when allocating the first pid > > in a pid namespace. idr_init always initialized idr_next to 0. > > > > So how we can get past: > > > > if (unlikely(is_child_reaper(pid))) { > > if (pid_ns_prepare_proc(ns)) { > > disable_pid_allocation(ns); > > goto out_free; > > } > > } > > > > with proc_mnt still set to NULL is a mystery to me. > > > > Is there any chance the idr code doesn't always return the lowest valid > > free number? So init gets assigned something other than 1? > > Well, this theory is easy to test (attached).
I'll give this a shot and report back when I get to the office.
> There is a "valid" way to break the code via kernel.ns_last_pid: > unshare+write+fork but the reproducer doesn't seem to use it (or it does?)
that sysctl is root only, so that isn't at play here.
Dav
| |