lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Apr]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH -mm 4/5] fault-inject: simplify access check for fail-nth
2017-04-08 5:45 GMT+09:00 Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>:
> On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The fail-nth file is created with 0666 and the access is permitted if
>> and only if the task is current.
>>
>> This file is owned by the currnet user. So we can create it with 0644
>> and allow the owner to write it. This enables to watch the status of
>> task->fail_nth from another processes.
>>
>> Cc: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@gmail.com>
>> ---
>> fs/proc/base.c | 22 ++++++++--------------
>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/proc/base.c b/fs/proc/base.c
>> index 9d14215..14e7b73 100644
>> --- a/fs/proc/base.c
>> +++ b/fs/proc/base.c
>> @@ -1366,16 +1366,16 @@ static ssize_t proc_fail_nth_write(struct file *file, const char __user *buf,
>> int err;
>> unsigned int n;
>>
>> + err = kstrtoint_from_user(buf, count, 0, &n);
>> + if (err)
>> + return err;
>> +
>> task = get_proc_task(file_inode(file));
>> if (!task)
>> return -ESRCH;
>> + task->fail_nth = n;
>> put_task_struct(task);
>> - if (task != current)
>> - return -EPERM;
>> - err = kstrtouint_from_user(buf, count, 0, &n);
>> - if (err)
>> - return err;
>> - current->fail_nth = n;
>> +
>> return count;
>> }
>>
>> @@ -1389,11 +1389,9 @@ static ssize_t proc_fail_nth_read(struct file *file, char __user *buf,
>> task = get_proc_task(file_inode(file));
>> if (!task)
>> return -ESRCH;
>> - put_task_struct(task);
>> - if (task != current)
>> - return -EPERM;
>> len = snprintf(numbuf, sizeof(numbuf), "%u\n", task->fail_nth);
>> len = simple_read_from_buffer(buf, count, ppos, numbuf, len);
>> + put_task_struct(task);
>>
>> return len;
>> }
>> @@ -3358,11 +3356,7 @@ static const struct pid_entry tid_base_stuff[] = {
>> #endif
>> #ifdef CONFIG_FAULT_INJECTION
>> REG("make-it-fail", S_IRUGO|S_IWUSR, proc_fault_inject_operations),
>> - /*
>> - * Operations on the file check that the task is current,
>> - * so we create it with 0666 to support testing under unprivileged user.
>> - */
>> - REG("fail-nth", 0666, proc_fail_nth_operations),
>> + REG("fail-nth", 0644, proc_fail_nth_operations),
>
> /\/\/\/\/\/\
>
> This breaks us.
> Under setuid sandbox test threads can't open the file anymore. And we
> can't pre-open the files before dropping privs as new threads can be
> created afterwards.

Could you provide a working example for this? Because I'm not sure
I understand the problem you described here.

If we omit resetting tsk->fail_nth in dup_task_struct(), tsk->fail_nth
is inherited from parent to child process. So the parent process can
pre-open and set fail-nth file and reset parent's own ->fail_nth after
fork by writing 0 to fail-nth file. Does that fix your problem?

> I think the root cause of all these problems (permissions, parsing,
> serialization, broken cat, symmetry) is that we are trying to fit a
> programmatic API into reads and writes on textual files. We don't need
> symmetry, we don't need read+write to reset injection, we don't need
> parsing and serialization, it does not make sense to do this of
> non-current task, it definitely does not make sense to cat this, etc.
>
> What do you think of 2 ioctls on /sys/kernel/debug/fail_nth?

I think the misc device is suitable than debugfs file for ioctl only
knob. But I prefer read/write interface than ioctl if possible.

>> #endif
>> #ifdef CONFIG_TASK_IO_ACCOUNTING
>> ONE("io", S_IRUSR, proc_tid_io_accounting),
>> --
>> 2.7.4
>>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-04-08 10:26    [W:0.092 / U:1.316 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site