|
Message-ID: <CAJEL0W_9-3_sxyHNFDUMC8q7DCM78BTkYA+qHWBHqJqVXPfdug@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2017 11:09:21 +0200 From: Petr Skočík <pskocik@...il.com> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: posix_spawn topics [was: Re: musl 1.1.17 released] Patch patch (Forgot `<0`) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Petr Skocik <pskocik@...il.com> Date: Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 11:02 AM Subject: Re: [musl] posix_spawn topics [was: Re: [musl] musl 1.1.17 released] To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Thanks for the feedback. I was using it modified like this because I need the enhanced adddup2 semantics since I want to do all my opens in the parent for more fine-grained error reporting. So I only really care about clearing the FD_CLOEXEC flag in the FDOP_DUP2 case, and so I'm glad you're willing to accept the semantics change. (Attached is perhaps a mergeable patch.) On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 3:17 AM, Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 02:11:35AM +0200, Petr Skocik wrote: > > Hi. > > Since posix_spawn is being discussed, I'd like to report a what I think > is > > a bug in the current implementation: > > Since the child is unmasking its signals only after it's performed its > file > > actions, the process may get blocked indefinitely (e.g., on a FIFO > > open) while being unresponsive to signals. > > > > Example program (with close to no error checking): > > > > > > #define _GNU_SOURCE > > #include <unistd.h> > > #include <spawn.h> > > #include <stdlib.h> > > #include <fcntl.h> > > #include <sys/types.h> > > #include <sys/stat.h> > > #include <sys/wait.h> > > int main() > > { > > pid_t pid; > > mkfifo("fifo", 0640); > > posix_spawn_file_actions_t fa; > > posix_spawn_file_actions_init(&fa); > > posix_spawn_file_actions_addopen(&fa, 0, "fifo", O_RDONLY, 0); > > posix_spawnp(&pid, "tr", &fa, 0, (char *const[]){ "tr", "a-z", "A-Z", 0}, > > environ); > > > > //will get stuck here > > > > } > > > > > > It think the pthread_mask call should be moved above the file actions, > > which fixes this problem. > > It's actually rather ugly that this happens at all. Your "fix" is > presumably that ^C now works, which of course helps. But short of > terminals signals there's no legitimate way to kill the hung process > because its pid has not been returned yet. > > I'm not really sure what should happen here; it may call for an > interpretation request. > > > Additionally, as far as extensions to the current POSIX standard are > > concerned, adding the herein (http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=411 > ) > > proposed change to *adddup2 semantics (clearing the FD_CLOEXEC flag on > the > > (given target in dup2 file actions where the source and target > > filedescriptor are identical) would be super nice (the reasoning for it > > should be in the link). > > I wasn't aware of that part of #411; I agree it should be adopted now > without waiting for a new standard. > > > Finally, I noticed the error passing code can be reduced to a simple > write > > to a volatile int made from the child (purely cosmetic). > > The pipe is there for a very important reason, and the reason is not > passing the error. It just happens that, since we already have to read > from it in the parent anyway, it makes a convenient channel to pass > the error on. Your modified version has serious memory corruption > because the parent continues running (and may return from posix_spawn) > after args->ret is set but before the child exits, thereby ending the > lifetime of the child's stack. Atomicity of closing of the > close-on-exec pipe with respect to exec is the property we're using > here to detect when exec has taken effect and memory is no longer > shared. > > An argument can be made that CLONE_VFORK mandates the schedudler > prevent this, but historically it did not always do this correctly, > especially when traced (and I believe it's still possible when tracing > to manually resume the parent while the child is still sharing > memory), and the intent is to be compatible with kernels where > CLONE_VFORK is a nop. The main reason CLONE_VFORK is used is actually > as a hint to qemu-userlevel to get it to emulate things right. > > > Attached are patches for these 3 things in case you wanted them. (I hope > > I'm not doing something stupid.) > > Otherwise no, not "stupid", but the patches are a lot larger/more > invasive than they need to be and don't follow coding style. > > > @@ -97,14 +108,14 @@ static int child(void *args_vp) > > __syscall(SYS_close, op->fd); > > break; > > case FDOP_DUP2: > > - if ((ret=__sys_dup2(op->srcfd, op->fd))<0) > > + if ((ret=dup3_or_set_cloexec(op->srcfd, > op->fd, 0))<0) > > goto fail; > > break; > > case FDOP_OPEN: > > fd = __sys_open(op->path, op->oflag, > op->mode); > > if ((ret=fd) < 0) goto fail; > > if (fd != op->fd) { > > - if ((ret=__sys_dup2(fd, op->fd))<0) > > + if ((ret=dup3_or_set_cloexec(fd, > op->fd, 0))<0) > > This (FDOP_OPEN) is not a case covered by the POSIX interpretation, > and using it here would actually be wrong if it were reachable, but > you're already inside "if (fd != op->fd)" and thus there's no way > fd==op->fd can be true. So the change in this line is just spurious. > There's then just one place where dup3_or_set_cloexec is called (the > previous case), and it doesn't make sense to have a function; rather > the conditional should just be inline in that case. > > Rich > Content of type "text/html" skipped View attachment "0001-New-posix_spawn_file_actions_adddup2-semantics.patch" of type "text/x-patch" (1171 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.