This commit fixes crash described in
https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/6533
Multiple ExecStart lines are allowed only for oneshot services
anyway so it doesn't make sense to call service_run_next_main() with
services of type other than SERVICE_ONESHOT.
Referring back to reproducer from the issue, previously we didn't observe
this problem because s->main_command was reset after daemon-reload hence
we never reached the assert statement in service_run_next_main().
Fixes#6533
Following commit b498d6ea, I belated realized we should tighten the
assertions as well, to make sure that we're setting `m->action_what` to
represent an action in progress. (The check for an action in progress is
to compare `m->action_what` to zero)
This fixed https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1476313
as much as I was able to reproduce it in a VM, at least.
E.g. this signal might wake the screen back up, providing a more visible
indicator of suspend failure. In my VM testing, it was also required in
order to unblock keyboard input in gnome-shell after the failed suspend.
At the same time, fix the error handling for scheduled shutdowns. This now
mirrors the behaviour of when you use `shutdown -k` - it sends all the
scary messages about shutting down, "but you'll have to do it [shut down
the system] yourself". It also avoids the risk of locking out the admin
(nologin file), in case they logged out for some reason (and they use
`sudo` instead of root).
Not that I have any idea why you'd want to use `shutdown -k`, but the code
is easier to analyze if it rolls back on error (in the absence of any code
comment as to why that's not wanted).
There is no justification not to wait an extra (default) 5 seconds, for
a more graceful shutdown of user programs. Again, you don't get to ignore
delay inhibitors for unscheduled shutdowns, short of
`systemctl poweroff -f`.
It is simplest if we move the test for `m->shutdown_dry_run` into
manager_scheduled_shutdown_handler().
However we need to not add such delays during a "dry run". Otherwise, we
would still have to be considered "in progress" for some seconds after our
admin has seen the final wall message. If they go to `poweroff`, we would
have blocked them with a misleading error message. Note this `poweroff`
will still process delay inhibitors as needed. If the admin planned to
use a more forceful method... eh. It's their responsibility to assess
whether that's safe.
There is an argument that the alternative behaviour could be used (racily!)
to kludge around them not being able to shutdown to "single user mode". If
we cared about that case, we would have easily preserved non-racy support
for it in `shutdown`.
Additionally, though I think this code does read more easily by reducing
inconsistencies, we didn't come up with any use case for delay inhibitors
v.s. shutdown.[1] The SIGTERM v.s. SIGKILL delay is more general, and we
allow a whole 90 seconds for it, not just 5. So I don't think keeping this
approach bears a risk of significant damage.
[1] https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/inhibit/
> We don't want to shutdown while a suspend is running, and vice versa.
> This would be confusing and could lead to data loss in the worst case.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/systemd/+bug/1441253/comments/4
According to the above comment, if the conflicting operation is hung,
we don't want to force things when the admin has not passed a force option.
Similarly if you're not an admin, you probably shouldn't get to sneak
around this check by using a scheduled shutdown instead of an unscheduled
one. (And no-one so far thought it necessary to add such a permission in
PolKit).
Note that if the conflicting operation was _not_ hung, and we lost the
race with suspend, the system might not have shut down at the scheduled
time anyway. Which is no good if you were scheduling a power outage.
And scheduling a shutdown for an arbitrary time when the system is resumed,
does not seem a very useful semantic. More likely, scheduled shutdowns are
useful on systems which do not use suspend, such as multi-user servers.
(In which case even PolKit defaults likely don't let the users trigger
suspend).
There's no good reason to use `--wait` with ReloadOrRestartUnit, or
TryRestartUnit.
The message was also wrong in another sense. 'systemctl isolate'
starts units, but it did not support `--wait`. Although it's
unlikely anyone would want to do that in the first place.
For files which are vital to boot
1. Avoid opening any window where power loss will zero them out or worse.
I know app developers all coded to the ext3 implementation, but
the only formal documentation we have says we're broken if we actually
rely on it. E.g.
* `man mount`, search for `auto_da_alloc`.
* http://www.linux-mtd.infradead.org/faq/ubifs.html#L_atomic_change
* https://thunk.org/tytso/blog/2009/03/15/dont-fear-the-fsync/
2. If we tell the kernel we're interested in writing them to disk, it will
tell us if that fails. So at minimum, this means we play our part in
notifying the user about errors.
I refactored error-handling in `udevadm-hwdb` a little. It turns out I did
exactly the same as had already been done in the `systemd-hwdb` version,
i.e. commit d702dcd.
One of the benefits of updating a file "atomically", is to avoid losing the
old version. For example, if we run out of disk space half-way through.
Fix localed to enjoy this benefit.
Since hotplugs happen as soon as udevd is started, there is not much sense
in giving udev-trigger an After= dependency on any service. The device
could be hotplugged before coldplug starts.
This is intended to avoid the race window where we create the hwdb with
the wrong selinux context (then fix it up afterwards).
https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/3458#issuecomment-322444107
This patch adds two new special character prefixes to ExecStart= and
friends, in addition to the existing "-", "@" and "+":
"!" → much like "+", except with a much reduced effect as it only
disables the actual setresuid()/setresgid()/setgroups() calls, but
leaves all other security features on, including namespace
options. This is very useful in combination with
RuntimeDirectory= or DynamicUser= and similar option, as a user
is still allocated and used for the runtime directory, but the
actual UID/GID dropping is left to the daemon process itself.
This should make RuntimeDirectory= a lot more useful for daemons
which insist on doing their own privilege dropping.
"!!" → Similar to "!", but on systems supporting ambient caps this
becomes a NOP. This makes it relatively straightforward to write
unit files that make use of ambient capabilities to let systemd
drop all privs while retaining compatibility with systems that
lack ambient caps, where priv dropping is the left to the daemon
codes themselves.
This is an alternative approach to #6564 and related PRs.
This new group lists all UID/GID credential changing syscalls (which are
quite a number these days). This will become particularly useful in a
later commit, which uses this group to optionally permit user credential
changing to daemons in case ambient capabilities are not available.
These booleans simply store whether selinux/apparmor/smack are supposed
ot be used, and chache the various mac_xyz_use() calls before we
transition into the namespace, hence let's use the same verb for the
variables and the functions: "use"
Let's merge three if blocks that shall only run when sandboxing is applied
into one.
Note that this changes behaviour in one corner case: PrivateUsers=1 is
now honours both PermissionsStartOnly= and the "+" modifier in
ExecStart=, and not just the former, as before. This was an oversight,
so let's fix this now, at a point in time the option isn't used much
yet.
"Permissions" was a bit of a misnomer, as it suggests that UNIX file
permission bits are adjusted, which aren't really changed here. Instead,
this is about UNIX credentials such as users or groups, as well as
namespacing, hence let's use a more generic term here, without any
misleading reference to UNIX file permissions: "sandboxing", which shall
refer to all kinds of sandboxing technologies, including UID/GID
dropping, selinux relabelling, namespacing, seccomp, and so on.
The new unit_set_exec_params() call is to units what
manager_set_exec_params() is to the manager object: it initializes the
various fields from the relevant generic properties set.
Let's decouple the Manager object from the execution logic a bit more
here too, and simply pass along the fact whether we should
unconditionally chown the runtime/... directories via the ExecFlags
field too.
Let's try to decouple the execution engine a bit from the Unit/Manager
concept, and hence pass one more flag as part of the ExecParameters flags
field.
Evgeny Vereshchagin
Susant Sahani
Lennart Poettering
Yu Watanabe
Michal Sekletar
Alan Jenkins
Felipe Sateler
Michael Biebl
Charles Huber
Susant Sahani
Justin Michaud