lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Mar]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/1] introduce user_ns inheritance in user-sched
Quoting Matt Helsley (matthltc@us.ibm.com):
> On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 04:16:15PM -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> > In a kernel compiled with CONFIG_USER_SCHED=y, cpu shares are
> > allocated according to uid. Shares are specifiable under
> > /sys/kernel/uids/<uid>/
> >
> > In a kernel compiled with CONFIG_USER_NS=y, clone(2) with the
> > CLONE_NEWUSER flag creates a new user namespace, and the newly
> > cloned task will belong to uid 0 in the new user namespace.
> >
> > Without this patch, if uid 500 calls clone(CLONE_NEWUSER) (which
> > is possible using a program with the cap_sys_admin,cap_setuid,cap_setgid=pe
> > file capabilities), then the new task will get the cpu shares of
> > uid 0.
> >
> > After this patch, if uid 500 calls clone(CLONE_NEWUSER), then even
> > though it is uid 0 in the new user namespace, it will be restricted to
> > the cpu shares of uid 500.
> >
> > Currently there is no way to set shares for uids in user namespaces
> > other than the initial one. That will be trivial to add when
> > sysfs tagging (or its functional equivalent, also needed to
> > expose network devices in network namespaces other than init)
> > becomes available.
> >
> > Until cross-user-namespace file accesses are enforced, nothing
> > stops uid 0 in a child namespace from simply writing new values
> > into /sys/kernel/uids/500.
> >
> > Here are results of some testing with and without the patch.
> >
> > Cpu shares are initialized as follows::
> > user root: 2048
> > user hallyn: 1024
> > user serge: 512
> >
> > Results are the 'real' part of time make -j4 > o 2>&1,
> > each time after a make clean.
> >
> > =================================================================
> > UNPATCHED
> > User 1: user serge creates a child user_ns and runs as user root
> > User 2: hallyn runs as user hallyn
> > =================================================================
> > User 1 User 2
> > run 1: 2m58.834s 3m0.609s
> > run 2: 2m59.248s 2m59.457s
> >
> > =============================================================
> > PATCHED
> > User 1: user serge
> > User 2: user hallyn
> > =============================================================
> >
> > User 1 User 2
> > run 1: 3m6.337s 2m22.681s
> > run 2: 3m6.323s 2m21.855s
> >
> > =============================================================
> > PATCHED
> > User 1: user serge setuid to user root
> > User 2: hallyn
> > =============================================================
> >
> > User 1 User 2
> > run 1: 2m17.782s 3m3.947s
> > run 2: 2m18.497s 3m7.961s
> >
> > ==========================================================
> > PATCHED
> > User 1: user root inside userns created by userid serge
> > User 2: hallyn
> > ==========================================================
> >
> > User 1 User 2
> > run 1: 3m9.876s 2m8.428s
> > run 2: 3m8.539s 2m6.356s
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Serge E. Hallyn <serue@us.ibm.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Dhaval Giani <dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > Cc: mingo@elte.hu
> > Cc: Bharata B Rao <bharata@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > Cc: peterz@infradead.org
> > ---
> > kernel/user.c | 12 +++++++++---
> > kernel/user_namespace.c | 2 +-
> > 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/user.c b/kernel/user.c
> > index 850e0ba..53aeea2 100644
> > --- a/kernel/user.c
> > +++ b/kernel/user.c
> > @@ -101,7 +101,12 @@ static int sched_create_user(struct user_struct *up)
> > {
> > int rc = 0;
> >
> > - up->tg = sched_create_group(&root_task_group);
> > + struct task_group *parent = &root_task_group;
> > +
> > + if (up->user_ns != &init_user_ns)
> > + parent = up->user_ns->creator->tg;
> > +
> > + up->tg = sched_create_group(parent);
> > if (IS_ERR(up->tg))
> > rc = -ENOMEM;
> >
> > @@ -434,11 +439,11 @@ struct user_struct *alloc_uid(struct user_namespace *ns, uid_t uid)
> > new->uid = uid;
> > atomic_set(&new->__count, 1);
> >
> > + new->user_ns = get_user_ns(ns);
> > +
> > if (sched_create_user(new) < 0)
> > goto out_free_user;
> >
> > - new->user_ns = get_user_ns(ns);
> > -
> > if (uids_user_create(new))
> > goto out_destoy_sched;
> >
> > @@ -472,6 +477,7 @@ out_destoy_sched:
> > sched_destroy_user(new);
> > put_user_ns(new->user_ns);
>
> Shouldn't this put_user_ns(new->user_ns) be removed? It looks like two
> references to new->user_ns are being dropped if anything fails
> after sched_create_user(new) succeeds yet as far as I can tell the
> patch does not introduce any new references to new->user_ns.

Ouch, yeah, thought I'd done that...

Thanks for catching that! Will resend.

> Otherwise looks good to me.
>
> Cheers,
> -Matt Helsley

thanks,
-serge


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-03-20 01:11    [W:0.092 / U:37.980 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site