Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 26 Aug 2013 10:23:12 +0200 | From | Yann Droneaud <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2] ppc: kvm: use anon inode getfd( ) with O CLOEXEC flag |
| |
Le 26.08.2013 09:39, Paolo Bonzini a écrit : > Il 25/08/2013 17:04, Alexander Graf ha scritto: >> On 24.08.2013, at 21:14, Yann Droneaud wrote: >> >>> >>> This patch set O_CLOEXEC flag on all file descriptors created >>> with anon_inode_getfd() to not leak file descriptors across exec(). >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Yann Droneaud <ydroneaud@opteya.com> >>> Link: >>> http://lkml.kernel.org/r/cover.1377372576.git.ydroneaud@opteya.com >> >> Reviewed-by: Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de> >> >> Would it make sense to simply inherit the O_CLOEXEC flag from the >> parent kvm fd instead? That would give user space the power to keep >> fds across exec() if it wants to. > > Does it make sense to use non-O_CLOEXEC file descriptors with KVM at > all? Besides fork() not being supported by KVM, as described in > Documentation/virtual/kvm/api.txt, the VMAs of the parent process go > away as soon as you exec(). I'm not sure how you can use the inherited > file descriptor in a sensible way after exec(). >
Sounds a lot like InfiniBand subsystem behavor: IB file descriptors are of no use accross exec() since memory mappings tied to those fds won't be available in the new process:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/7/8/380 http://mid.gmane.org/f58540dc64fec1ac0e496dfcd3cc1af7@meuh.org
Regards.
-- Yann Droneaud OPTEYA
-- 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/
| |