On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 04:32:14PM +0200, Jann Horn wrote: > On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 1:51 PM Christian Brauner <christian@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > [...] > > I kept it dumb and was about to reply that your solution introduces more > > code when it seemed we wanted to keep this very simple for now. > > But then I saw that find_next_opened_fd() already exists as > > find_next_fd(). So it's actually not bad compared to what I sent in v1. > > So - with some small tweaks (need to test it and all now) - how do we > > feel about?: > [...] > > static int __close_next_open_fd(struct files_struct *files, unsigned *curfd, unsigned maxfd) > > { > > struct file *file = NULL; > > unsigned fd; > > struct fdtable *fdt; > > > > spin_lock(&files->file_lock); > > fdt = files_fdtable(files); > > fd = find_next_fd(fdt, *curfd); > > find_next_fd() finds free fds, not used ones. > > > if (fd >= fdt->max_fds || fd > maxfd) > > goto out_unlock; > > > > file = fdt->fd[fd]; > > rcu_assign_pointer(fdt->fd[fd], NULL); > > __put_unused_fd(files, fd); > > You can't do __put_unused_fd() if the old pointer in fdt->fd[fd] was > NULL - because that means that the fd has been reserved by another > thread that is about to put a file pointer in there, and if you > release the fd here, that messes up the refcounting (or hits the > BUG_ON() in __fd_install()). > > > out_unlock: > > spin_unlock(&files->file_lock); > > > > if (!file) > > return -EBADF; > > > > *curfd = fd; > > filp_close(file, files); > > return 0; > > } > > > > int __close_range(struct files_struct *files, unsigned fd, unsigned max_fd) > > { > > if (fd > max_fd) > > return -EINVAL; > > > > while (fd <= max_fd) { > > Note that with a pattern like this, you have to be careful about what > happens if someone gives you max_fd==0xffffffff - then this condition > is always true and the loop can not terminate this way. > > > if (__close_next_fd(files, &fd, maxfd)) > > break; > > (obviously it can still terminate this way) Yup, this was only a quick draft. I think the dumb simple thing that I did before was the best way to do it for now. I first thought that the find_next_open_fd() function already exists but when I went to write a POC for testing realized it doesn't anyway.