linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH v8 3/9] seccomp: introduce writer locking

To: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 3/9] seccomp: introduce writer locking
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 20:07:05 +0200
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>, "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@redhat.com>, Will Drewry <wad@chromium.org>, Julien Tinnes <jln@chromium.org>, David Drysdale <drysdale@google.com>, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org
In-reply-to: <1403642893-23107-4-git-send-email-keescook@chromium.org>
List-archive: <http://www.linux-mips.org/archives/linux-mips/>
List-help: <mailto:ecartis@linux-mips.org?Subject=help>
List-id: linux-mips <linux-mips.eddie.linux-mips.org>
List-owner: <mailto:ralf@linux-mips.org>
List-post: <mailto:linux-mips@linux-mips.org>
List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0
List-subscribe: <mailto:ecartis@linux-mips.org?subject=subscribe%20linux-mips>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:ecartis@linux-mips.org?subject=unsubscribe%20linux-mips>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <1403642893-23107-1-git-send-email-keescook@chromium.org> <1403642893-23107-4-git-send-email-keescook@chromium.org>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
On 06/24, Kees Cook wrote:
>
> +static void copy_seccomp(struct task_struct *p)
> +{
> +#ifdef CONFIG_SECCOMP
> +     /*
> +      * Must be called with sighand->lock held, which is common to
> +      * all threads in the group. Regardless, nothing special is
> +      * needed for the child since it is not yet in the tasklist.
> +      */
> +     BUG_ON(!spin_is_locked(&current->sighand->siglock));
> +
> +     get_seccomp_filter(current);
> +     p->seccomp = current->seccomp;
> +
> +     if (p->seccomp.mode != SECCOMP_MODE_DISABLED)
> +             set_tsk_thread_flag(p, TIF_SECCOMP);
> +#endif
> +}

Wait. But what about no_new_privs? We should copy it as well...

Perhaps this helper should be updated a bit and moved into seccomp.c so
that seccomp_sync_threads() could use it too.

Oleg.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>