| Message ID | 01783b8c-2a39-73ec-c537-cc1df82643e2@huawei.com |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
| Series | misc/fsck.c: Processes may kill other processes. | expand |
On Sat, Oct 08, 2022 at 11:05:48AM +0800, zhanchengbin wrote: > If run the fsck -N command, processes don't execute, just show what > would be done. However, the pid whose value is -1 is added to the > instance_list list in the execute function,if the kill_all function > is called later, kill(-1, signum) is executed, Signals are sent to > all processes except the number one process and itself. Other > processes will be killed if they use the default signal processing > function. > > Signed-off-by: zhanchengbin <zhanchengbin1@huawei.com> > --- > misc/fsck.c | 2 ++ > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/misc/fsck.c b/misc/fsck.c > index 4efe10ec..faf7789d 100644 > --- a/misc/fsck.c > +++ b/misc/fsck.c > @@ -546,6 +546,8 @@ static int kill_all(int signum) > for (inst = instance_list; inst; inst = inst->next) { > if (inst->flags & FLAG_DONE) > continue; > + if (inst->pid == -1) > + continue; That works, but I think we can afford to be a little defensive here. Anything <= 0 is a bug and can have unexpected consequences if we actually call the kill(). if (inst->pid <= 0) continue; Also as Darrick pointed out we need to send the patch to util-linux (disk-utils/fsck.c) as well if you haven't already. -Lukas > kill(inst->pid, signum); > n++; > } > -- > 2.27.0 >
On 2022/10/10 15:17, Lukas Czerner wrote: > On Sat, Oct 08, 2022 at 11:05:48AM +0800, zhanchengbin wrote: >> If run the fsck -N command, processes don't execute, just show what >> would be done. However, the pid whose value is -1 is added to the >> instance_list list in the execute function,if the kill_all function >> is called later, kill(-1, signum) is executed, Signals are sent to >> all processes except the number one process and itself. Other >> processes will be killed if they use the default signal processing >> function. >> >> Signed-off-by: zhanchengbin <zhanchengbin1@huawei.com> >> --- >> misc/fsck.c | 2 ++ >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/misc/fsck.c b/misc/fsck.c >> index 4efe10ec..faf7789d 100644 >> --- a/misc/fsck.c >> +++ b/misc/fsck.c >> @@ -546,6 +546,8 @@ static int kill_all(int signum) >> for (inst = instance_list; inst; inst = inst->next) { >> if (inst->flags & FLAG_DONE) >> continue; >> + if (inst->pid == -1) >> + continue; > > That works, but I think we can afford to be a little defensive here. > Anything <= 0 is a bug and can have unexpected consequences if we > actually call the kill(). > > if (inst->pid <= 0) > continue OK, I'll fix this and send the v2 version of the patch. > > > Also as Darrick pointed out we need to send the patch to util-linux > (disk-utils/fsck.c) as well if you haven't already. I'll check and modify util-linux(disk-utils/fsck.c). -zhanchengbin > > -Lukas > > >> kill(inst->pid, signum); >> n++; >> } >> -- >> 2.27.0 >> > > . >
diff --git a/misc/fsck.c b/misc/fsck.c index 4efe10ec..faf7789d 100644 --- a/misc/fsck.c +++ b/misc/fsck.c @@ -546,6 +546,8 @@ static int kill_all(int signum) for (inst = instance_list; inst; inst = inst->next) { if (inst->flags & FLAG_DONE) continue; + if (inst->pid == -1) + continue; kill(inst->pid, signum); n++; }
If run the fsck -N command, processes don't execute, just show what would be done. However, the pid whose value is -1 is added to the instance_list list in the execute function,if the kill_all function is called later, kill(-1, signum) is executed, Signals are sent to all processes except the number one process and itself. Other processes will be killed if they use the default signal processing function. Signed-off-by: zhanchengbin <zhanchengbin1@huawei.com> --- misc/fsck.c | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)