Re: [RFC PATCH 5/6] selftests: Challenge RLIMIT_NPROC in user namespaces

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 2/7/22 5:17 AM, Michal Koutný wrote:
The services are started in descendant user namepaces, each of them
should honor the RLIMIT_NPROC that's passed during user namespace
creation.

	main [user_ns_0]
	  ` service [user_ns_1]
	    ` worker 1
	    ` worker 2
	    ...
	    ` worker k
	  ...
	  ` service [user_ns_n]
	    ` worker 1
	    ` worker 2
	    ...
	    ` worker k

Test uses explicit synchronization, to make sure original parent's limit
does not interfere with descendants.


Thank you for updating the test with the kernel updates. Please see
comments below. A bit of a concern with how long this test will run.
Did you time it?

Signed-off-by: Michal Koutný <mkoutny@xxxxxxxx>
---
  .../selftests/rlimits/rlimits-per-userns.c    | 154 ++++++++++++++----
  1 file changed, 125 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/rlimits/rlimits-per-userns.c b/tools/testing/selftests/rlimits/rlimits-per-userns.c
index 26dc949e93ea..54c1b345e42b 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/rlimits/rlimits-per-userns.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/rlimits/rlimits-per-userns.c
@@ -9,7 +9,9 @@
  #include <sys/resource.h>
  #include <sys/prctl.h>
  #include <sys/stat.h>
+#include <sys/socket.h>
+#include <assert.h>
  #include <unistd.h>
  #include <stdlib.h>
  #include <stdio.h>
@@ -21,38 +23,74 @@
  #include <errno.h>
  #include <err.h>
-#define NR_CHILDS 2
+#define THE_LIMIT 4
+#define NR_CHILDREN 5
+
+static_assert(NR_CHILDREN >= THE_LIMIT-1, "Need slots for limit-1 children.");
static char *service_prog;
  static uid_t user   = 60000;
  static uid_t group  = 60000;
+static struct rlimit saved_limit;
+
+/* Two uses: main and service */
+static pid_t child[NR_CHILDREN];
+static pid_t pid;
static void setrlimit_nproc(rlim_t n)
  {
-	pid_t pid = getpid();
  	struct rlimit limit = {
  		.rlim_cur = n,
  		.rlim_max = n
  	};
-
-	warnx("(pid=%d): Setting RLIMIT_NPROC=%ld", pid, n);
+	if (getrlimit(RLIMIT_NPROC, &saved_limit) < 0)
+		err(EXIT_FAILURE, "(pid=%d): getrlimit(RLIMIT_NPROC)", pid);
if (setrlimit(RLIMIT_NPROC, &limit) < 0)
  		err(EXIT_FAILURE, "(pid=%d): setrlimit(RLIMIT_NPROC)", pid);
+
+	warnx("(pid=%d): Set RLIMIT_NPROC=%ld", pid, n);
+}
+
+static void restore_rlimit_nproc(void)
+{
+	if (setrlimit(RLIMIT_NPROC, &saved_limit) < 0)
+		err(EXIT_FAILURE, "(pid=%d): setrlimit(RLIMIT_NPROC, saved)", pid);
+	warnx("(pid=%d) Restored RLIMIT_NPROC", pid);
  }
-static pid_t fork_child(void)
+enum msg_sync {
+	UNSHARE,
+	RLIMIT_RESTORE,
+};
+
+static void sync_notify(int fd, enum msg_sync m)
  {
-	pid_t pid = fork();
+	char tmp = m;
+
+	if (write(fd, &tmp, 1) < 0)
+		warnx("(pid=%d): failed sync-write", pid);
+}
- if (pid < 0)
+static void sync_wait(int fd, enum msg_sync m)
+{
+	char tmp;
+
+	if (read(fd, &tmp, 1) < 0)
+		warnx("(pid=%d): failed sync-read", pid);
+}
+
+static pid_t fork_child(int control_fd)
+{
+	pid_t new_pid = fork();
+
+	if (new_pid < 0)
  		err(EXIT_FAILURE, "fork");
- if (pid > 0)
-		return pid;
+	if (new_pid > 0)
+		return new_pid;
pid = getpid();
-
  	warnx("(pid=%d): New process starting ...", pid);
if (prctl(PR_SET_PDEATHSIG, SIGKILL) < 0)
@@ -73,6 +111,9 @@ static pid_t fork_child(void)
  	if (unshare(CLONE_NEWUSER) < 0)
  		err(EXIT_FAILURE, "unshare(CLONE_NEWUSER)");
+ sync_notify(control_fd, UNSHARE);
+	sync_wait(control_fd, RLIMIT_RESTORE);
+
  	char *const argv[] = { "service", NULL };
  	char *const envp[] = { "I_AM_SERVICE=1", NULL };
@@ -82,37 +123,92 @@ static pid_t fork_child(void)
  	err(EXIT_FAILURE, "(pid=%d): execve", pid);
  }
+static void run_service(void)
+{
+	size_t i;
+	int ret = EXIT_SUCCESS;
+	struct rlimit limit;
+	char user_ns[PATH_MAX];
+
+	if (getrlimit(RLIMIT_NPROC, &limit) < 0)
+		err(EXIT_FAILURE, "(pid=%d) failed getrlimit", pid);
+	if (readlink("/proc/self/ns/user", user_ns, PATH_MAX) < 0)
+		err(EXIT_FAILURE, "(pid=%d) failed readlink", pid);
+
+	warnx("(pid=%d) Service instance attempts %i children, limit %lu:%lu, ns=%s",
+	      pid, THE_LIMIT, limit.rlim_cur, limit.rlim_max, user_ns);
+
+	/* test rlimit inside the service, effectively THE_LIMIT-1 becaue of service itself */
+	for (i = 0; i < THE_LIMIT; i++) {
+		child[i] = fork();
+		if (child[i] == 0) {
+			/* service child */
+			pause();
+			exit(EXIT_SUCCESS);
+		}
+		if (child[i] < 0) {
+			warnx("(pid=%d) service fork %lu failed, errno = %i", pid, i+1, errno);
+			if (!(i == THE_LIMIT-1 && errno == EAGAIN))
+				ret = EXIT_FAILURE;
+		} else if (i == THE_LIMIT-1) {
+			warnx("(pid=%d) RLIMIT_NPROC not honored", pid);
+			ret = EXIT_FAILURE;
+		}
+	}
+
+	/* service cleanup */
+	for (i = 0; i < THE_LIMIT; i++)
+		if (child[i] > 0)
+			kill(child[i], SIGUSR1);
+
+	for (i = 0; i < THE_LIMIT; i++)
+		if (child[i] > 0)
+			waitpid(child[i], NULL, WNOHANG);
+
+	if (ret)
+		exit(ret);
+	pause();
+}
+
  int main(int argc, char **argv)
  {
  	size_t i;
-	pid_t child[NR_CHILDS];
-	int wstatus[NR_CHILDS];
-	int childs = NR_CHILDS;
-	pid_t pid;
+	int control_fd[NR_CHILDREN];
+	int wstatus[NR_CHILDREN];
+	int children = NR_CHILDREN;
+	int sockets[2];
+
+	pid = getpid();
if (getenv("I_AM_SERVICE")) {
-		pause();
-		exit(EXIT_SUCCESS);
+		run_service();
+		exit(EXIT_FAILURE);

Why is this a failure unconditionally?

  	}
service_prog = argv[0];
-	pid = getpid();
warnx("(pid=%d) Starting testcase", pid); - /*
-	 * This rlimit is not a problem for root because it can be exceeded.
-	 */
-	setrlimit_nproc(1);
-
-	for (i = 0; i < NR_CHILDS; i++) {
-		child[i] = fork_child();
+	setrlimit_nproc(THE_LIMIT);
+	for (i = 0; i < NR_CHILDREN; i++) {
+		if (socketpair(AF_UNIX, SOCK_DGRAM | SOCK_CLOEXEC, 0, sockets) < 0)
+			err(EXIT_FAILURE, "(pid=%d) socketpair failed", pid);
+		control_fd[i] = sockets[0];
+		child[i] = fork_child(sockets[1]);
  		wstatus[i] = 0;
+	}
+
+	for (i = 0; i < NR_CHILDREN; i++)
+		sync_wait(control_fd[i], UNSHARE);
+	restore_rlimit_nproc();
+
+	for (i = 0; i < NR_CHILDREN; i++) {
+		sync_notify(control_fd[i], RLIMIT_RESTORE);
  		usleep(250000);

How long does this test now run for with this loop?

  	}
while (1) {
-		for (i = 0; i < NR_CHILDS; i++) {
+		for (i = 0; i < NR_CHILDREN; i++) {
  			if (child[i] <= 0)
  				continue;
@@ -126,22 +222,22 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
  				warn("(pid=%d): waitpid(%d)", pid, child[i]);
child[i] *= -1;
-			childs -= 1;
+			children -= 1;
  		}
- if (!childs)
+		if (!children)
  			break;
usleep(250000); - for (i = 0; i < NR_CHILDS; i++) {
+		for (i = 0; i < NR_CHILDREN; i++) {
  			if (child[i] <= 0)
  				continue;
  			kill(child[i], SIGUSR1);
  		}
  	}
- for (i = 0; i < NR_CHILDS; i++) {
+	for (i = 0; i < NR_CHILDREN; i++) {
  		if (WIFEXITED(wstatus[i]))
  			warnx("(pid=%d): pid %d exited, status=%d",
  				pid, -child[i], WEXITSTATUS(wstatus[i]));


Please a add few more comments in the code path.

thanks,
-- Shuah



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Wireless]     [Linux Kernel]     [ATH6KL]     [Linux Bluetooth]     [Linux Netdev]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux