Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] pidfd: change pidfd_send_signal() to respect PIDFD_THREAD

From: Oleg Nesterov
Date: Wed Feb 14 2024 - 07:39:23 EST


On 02/10, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> On 02/10, Christian Brauner wrote:
> >
> > + if (type == PIDFD_SIGNAL_PROCESS_GROUP)
> > + ret = kill_pgrp_info(sig, &kinfo, pid);
>
> I guess you meant
>
> if (type == PIDTYPE_PGID)
>
> other than that,
>
> Reviewed-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx>

Yes, but there is another thing I hadn't thought of...

sys_pidfd_send_signal() does

/* Only allow sending arbitrary signals to yourself. */
ret = -EPERM;
if ((task_pid(current) != pid) &&
(kinfo.si_code >= 0 || kinfo.si_code == SI_TKILL))
goto err;

and I am not sure that task_pid(current) == pid should allow
the "arbitrary signals" if PIDFD_SIGNAL_PROCESS_GROUP.

Perhaps

/* Only allow sending arbitrary signals to yourself. */
ret = -EPERM;
if ((task_pid(current) != pid || type == PIDTYPE_PGID) &&
(kinfo.si_code >= 0 || kinfo.si_code == SI_TKILL)
goto err;

?

Oleg.