From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AA63C47076 for ; Fri, 21 May 2021 15:45:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E84C5613EA for ; Fri, 21 May 2021 15:45:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S236326AbhEUPqR (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 May 2021 11:46:17 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:56928 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230291AbhEUPqO (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 May 2021 11:46:14 -0400 Received: by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AD34A613EC; Fri, 21 May 2021 15:44:48 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 21 May 2021 17:44:45 +0200 From: Christian Brauner To: Sargun Dhillon Cc: Kees Cook , LKML , containers@lists.linux.dev, Tycho Andersen , Andy Lutomirski , Mauricio =?utf-8?Q?V=C3=A1squez?= Bernal , Rodrigo Campos , Giuseppe Scrivano , =?utf-8?Q?Micka=C3=ABl_Sala=C3=BCn?= Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] Atomic addfd send and reply Message-ID: <20210521154445.yz26ja35t3ux7m6j@wittgenstein> References: <20210517193908.3113-1-sargun@sargun.me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210517193908.3113-1-sargun@sargun.me> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 12:39:04PM -0700, Sargun Dhillon wrote: > This is somewhat of a respin of "Handle seccomp notification preemption" > but without the controversial parts. > > > This patchset addresses a race condition we've dealt with recently with > seccomp. Specifically programs interrupting syscalls while they're in > progress. This was exacerbated by Golang's recent adoption of "async > preemption", in which they try to interrupt any syscall that's been running > for more than 10ms during GC. During certain syscalls, it's non-trivial to > write them in a reetrant manner in userspace (socket). > > It focuses on one use cases, which is adding file descriptors to a process > "atomically" during the seccomp reply, as opposed to discretizing the calls > which may result in a potential file descriptor leak and inconsistent > program state. Looks good, Acked-by: Christian Brauner