X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-Original-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
DMARC-Filter:	OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 17F5F3948A8D
Authentication-Results:	sourceware.org;
	dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=nifty.ne.jp
Authentication-Results:	sourceware.org; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=nifty.ne.jp
DKIM-Filter:	OpenDKIM Filter v2.10.3 conssluserg-02.nifty.com 20DAucdU026735
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nifty.ne.jp;
	s=dec2015msa; t=1642071398;
	bh=AdGLm6B4tnf0q51ivwEivt3POjOPFo6TU0YXfxYF2qY=;
	h=Date:From:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=SMXx+mIaXQjRHruoBQ0JHEkhQSOdOUcdC0W+MfDKxKV2Q8vxveRmPAP+7THPxg/hT
	BoHx78Tf1Nvwji4h0qbGCqDEL3js4NoZorw2xns8ti6ttqvO/7JHj9E0r5DW+wMFSh
	olRjNPsbwmyzm00RUkQKraBkg4lLF+81QwW3iC9q42tS/8jFcwPAIjSZ5wab0sQ28E
	L+QpBs/ZVrP+jl7qoPz9HGwswqdch5Ba3j942quKwnEt83m9pEs+MpcdrUkQp/kuzA
	IemDcZLtx+rjmsFJvuUAyIhKvaocDUFmSjuNxSFtQMQ3OQ9Owaf+v0WdnGfMnGkMiQ
	NrJMsebYI4/Gw==
X-Nifty-SrcIP:	[14.3.233.132]
Date:	Thu, 13 Jan 2022 19:56:38 +0900
From:	Takashi Yano <takashi DOT yano AT nifty DOT ne DOT jp>
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: [PATCH] fhandler_pipe: add sanity limit to handle loops
Message-Id:	<20220113195638.d64430e6b03159c70721fb45@nifty.ne.jp>
In-Reply-To:	<c7664703-0ec2-388f-64e3-8c46d4590b3e@cornell.edu>
References:	<alpine DOT BSO DOT 2 DOT 21 DOT 2112231503400 DOT 11760 AT resin DOT csoft DOT net>
	<f97bba17-16ab-d7be-01f6-1c057fb5f1a5 AT cornell DOT edu>
	<alpine DOT BSO DOT 2 DOT 21 DOT 2112231623490 DOT 11760 AT resin DOT csoft DOT net>
	<c5115e9b-6475-d30e-04d3-cb84cfa92b3a AT cornell DOT edu>
	<alpine DOT BSO DOT 2 DOT 21 DOT 2112241136160 DOT 11760 AT resin DOT csoft DOT net>
	<622d3ac6-fa5d-965c-52da-db7a4463fffd AT cornell DOT edu>
	<alpine DOT BSO DOT 2 DOT 21 DOT 2112241638280 DOT 11760 AT resin DOT csoft DOT net>
	<20211225121902 DOT 54b82f1bb0d4f958d34a8bb7 AT nifty DOT ne DOT jp>
	<alpine DOT BSO DOT 2 DOT 21 DOT 2112241945060 DOT 11760 AT resin DOT csoft DOT net>
	<20211225131242 DOT adef568db53d561a6b134612 AT nifty DOT ne DOT jp>
	<alpine DOT BSO DOT 2 DOT 21 DOT 2112242101520 DOT 11760 AT resin DOT csoft DOT net>
	<20211226021010 DOT a2b2ad28f12df9ffb25b6584 AT nifty DOT ne DOT jp>
	<alpine DOT BSO DOT 2 DOT 21 DOT 2112251111580 DOT 11760 AT resin DOT csoft DOT net>
	<alpine DOT BSO DOT 2 DOT 21 DOT 2112251457480 DOT 11760 AT resin DOT csoft DOT net>
	<8172019c-e048-4fe2-79c9-0b3262057d3e AT cornell DOT edu>
	<alpine DOT BSO DOT 2 DOT 21 DOT 2112252054310 DOT 11760 AT resin DOT csoft DOT net>
	<c7664703-0ec2-388f-64e3-8c46d4590b3e AT cornell DOT edu>
X-Mailer:	Sylpheed 3.7.0 (GTK+ 2.24.30; i686-pc-mingw32)
Mime-Version:	1.0
X-Spam-Status:	No, score=-3.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED,
	DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, NICE_REPLY_A, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,
	SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Spam-Checker-Version:	SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on
	server2.sourceware.org
X-BeenThere:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
X-Mailman-Version:	2.1.29
List-Id:	General Cygwin discussions and problem reports <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe:	<https://cygwin.com/mailman/options/cygwin>,
	<mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive:	<https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe:	<https://cygwin.com/mailman/listinfo/cygwin>,
	<mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To:	cygwin-bounces+archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com
Sender:	"Cygwin" <cygwin-bounces+archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>

I am sorry for being absent for a long time.

On Sun, 26 Dec 2021 10:09:57 -0500
Ken Brown wrote:
> On 12/25/2021 11:56 PM, Jeremy Drake wrote:
> > I set up a windows server 2022 VM last night and went nuts stressing
> > pacman/GPGME.  I was able to reproduce the issue there:
> > 
> > status = 0x00000000, phi->NumberOfHandles = 8261392, n_handle = 256
> > [#####----------------------------------]  14%
> > assertion "phi->NumberOfHandles <= n_handle" failed: file
> > "../../.././winsup/cygwin/fhandler_pipe.cc", line 1281, function: void*
> > fhandler_pipe::get_query_hdl_per_process(WCHAR*, OBJECT_NAME_INFORMATION*)
> > 
> > So it is not something inherent in the x86_64-on-ARM64 emulation but can
> > happen on native x86_64 also.
> 
> A Google search led me to something that might explain what's going on.  Look at 
> the function PhEnumHandlesEx2 starting at line 5713 in
> 
>   https://github.com/processhacker/processhacker/blob/master/phlib/native.c#L5152

Thank you very much for finding this,

> Two interesting things:
> 
> 1. For some processes, NtQueryInformationProcess(ProcessHandleInformation) can 
> return STATUS_SUCCESS with invalid handle information.  See the comment starting 
> at line 5754, where it is shown how to detect this.

and also applying the fix.

> 2. You can use the ReturnLength parameter of NtQueryInformationProcess to see 
> how big a buffer is needed.  This might be more efficient than repeatedly 
> doubling the buffer size.

Even if ReturnLength is used, the first NtQueryInformationProcess()
call and the second NtQueryInformationProcess() call will not be
done in atomic, so retrying is still necessary. However, it may be
more efficient as you mentioned.

The similar is true also for NtQuerySystemInformation().

Do you still think it is better to use ReturnLength rather than
doubling the buffer?

-- 
Takashi Yano <takashi DOT yano AT nifty DOT ne DOT jp>

-- 
Problem reports:      https://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                  https://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:        https://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:     https://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -