[lkml]   [2019]   [Mar]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/3] userfaultfd: allow to forbid unprivileged users
On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 01:01:40PM -0700, Mike Kravetz wrote:
> On 3/13/19 11:52 AM, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> >
> > hugetlbfs is more complicated to detect, because even if you inherit
> > it from fork(), the services that mounts the fs may be in a different
> > container than the one that Oracle that uses userfaultfd later on down
> > the road from a different context. And I don't think it would be ok to
> > allow running userfaultfd just because you can open a file in an
> > hugetlbfs file system. With /dev/kvm it's a bit different, that's
> > chmod o-r by default.. no luser should be able to open it.
> >
> > Unless somebody suggests a consistent way to make hugetlbfs "just
> > work" (like we could achieve clean with CRIU and KVM), I think Oracle
> > will need a one liner change in the Oracle setup to echo into that
> > file in addition of running the hugetlbfs mount.
> I think you are suggesting the DB setup process enable uffd for all users.
> Correct?

Yes. In addition of the hugetlbfs setup, various apps requires to also
increase fs.inotify.max_user_watches or file-max and other tweaks,
this would be one of those tweaks.

> This may be too simple, and I don't really like group access, but how about
> just defining a uffd group? If you are in the group you can make uffd
> system calls.

Everything is possible, I'm just afraid it gets too complex.

So you suggest to echo a gid into the file?

 \ /
  Last update: 2019-03-14 00:57    [W:0.155 / U:0.736 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site