[CRIU] [PATCH 0/4 POC] Allow executing code and syscalls in another address space
Florian Weimer
fweimer at redhat.com
Wed Apr 14 15:20:48 MSK 2021
* Jann Horn:
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 12:27 PM Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> * Andrei Vagin:
>>
>> > We already have process_vm_readv and process_vm_writev to read and write
>> > to a process memory faster than we can do this with ptrace. And now it
>> > is time for process_vm_exec that allows executing code in an address
>> > space of another process. We can do this with ptrace but it is much
>> > slower.
>> >
>> > = Use-cases =
>>
>> We also have some vaguely related within the same address space: running
>> code on another thread, without modifying its stack, while it has signal
>> handlers blocked, and without causing system calls to fail with EINTR.
>> This can be used to implement certain kinds of memory barriers.
>
> That's what the membarrier() syscall is for, right? Unless you don't
> want to register all threads for expedited membarrier use?
membarrier is not sufficiently powerful for revoking biased locks, for
example.
For the EINTR issue, <https://github.com/golang/go/issues/38836> is an
example. I believe CIFS has since seen a few fixes (after someone
reported that tar on CIFS wouldn't work because the SIGCHLD causing
utimensat to fail—and there isn't even a signal handler for SIGCHLD!),
but the time it took to get to this point doesn't give me confidence
that it is safe to send signals to a thread that is running unknown
code.
But as you explained regarding the set*id broadcast, it seems that if we
had this run-on-another-thread functionality, we would likely encounter
issues similar to those with SA_RESTART. We don't see the issue with
set*id today because it's a rare operation, and multi-threaded file
servers that need to change credentials frequently opt out of the set*id
broadcast anyway. (What I have in mind is a future world where any
printf call, any malloc call, can trigger such a broadcast.)
The cross-VM CRIU scenario would probably somewhere in between (not
quite the printf/malloc level, but more frequent than set*id).
Thanks,
Florian
More information about the CRIU
mailing list