linux-kernel - [PATCH 2/2] cgroup: Walk task list under tasklist_lock in cgroup_enable_task_cg

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed,  8 Feb 2012 03:37:27 +0100
From:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Mandeep Singh Baines <msb@...omium.org>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] cgroup: Walk task list under tasklist_lock in cgroup_enable_task_cg_list

Walking through the tasklist in cgroup_enable_task_cg_list() inside
an RCU read side critical section is not enough because:

- RCU is not (yet) safe against while_each_thread()

- If we use only RCU, a forking task that has passed cgroup_post_fork()
  without seeing use_task_css_set_links == 1 is not guaranteed to have
  its child immediately visible in the tasklist if we walk through it
  remotely with RCU. In this case it will be missing in its css_set's
  task list.

Thus we need to traverse the list (unfortunately) under the
tasklist_lock. It makes us safe against while_each_thread() and also
make sure we see all forked task that have been added to the tasklist.

As a secondary effect, reading and writing use_task_css_set_links are
now well ordered against tasklist traversing and modification. The new
layout is:

CPU 0                                      CPU 1

use_task_css_set_links = 1                write_lock(tasklist_lock)
read_lock(tasklist_lock)                  add task to tasklist
do_each_thread() {                        write_unlock(tasklist_lock)
	add thread to css set links       if (use_task_css_set_links)
} while_each_thread()                         add thread to css set links
read_unlock(tasklist_lock)

If CPU 0 traverse the list after the task has been added to the tasklist
then it is correctly added to the css set links. OTOH if CPU 0 traverse
the tasklist before the new task had the opportunity to be added to the
tasklist because it was too early in the fork process, then CPU 1
catches up and add the task to the css set links after it added the task
to the tasklist. The right value of use_task_css_set_links is guaranteed
to be visible from CPU 1 due to the LOCK/UNLOCK implicit barrier properties:
the read_unlock on CPU 0 makes the write on use_task_css_set_links happening
and the write_lock on CPU 1 make the read of use_task_css_set_links that comes
afterward to return the correct value.

Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: Mandeep Singh Baines <msb@...omium.org>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
---
 kernel/cgroup.c |   20 ++++++++++++++++++++
 1 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/cgroup.c b/kernel/cgroup.c
index 6e4eb43..c6877fe 100644
--- a/kernel/cgroup.c
+++ b/kernel/cgroup.c
@@ -2707,6 +2707,14 @@ static void cgroup_enable_task_cg_lists(void)
 	struct task_struct *p, *g;
 	write_lock(&css_set_lock);
 	use_task_css_set_links = 1;
+	/*
+	 * We need tasklist_lock because RCU is not safe against
+	 * while_each_thread(). Besides, a forking task that has passed
+	 * cgroup_post_fork() without seeing use_task_css_set_links = 1
+	 * is not guaranteed to have its child immediately visible in the
+	 * tasklist if we walk through it with RCU.
+	 */
+	read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
 	do_each_thread(g, p) {
 		task_lock(p);
 		/*
@@ -2718,6 +2726,7 @@ static void cgroup_enable_task_cg_lists(void)
 			list_add(&p->cg_list, &p->cgroups->tasks);
 		task_unlock(p);
 	} while_each_thread(g, p);
+	read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
 	write_unlock(&css_set_lock);
 }
 
@@ -4522,6 +4531,17 @@ void cgroup_fork_callbacks(struct task_struct *child)
  */
 void cgroup_post_fork(struct task_struct *child)
 {
+	/*
+	 * use_task_css_set_links is set to 1 before we walk the tasklist
+	 * under the tasklist_lock and we read it here after we added the child
+	 * to the tasklist under the tasklist_lock as well. If the child wasn't
+	 * yet in the tasklist when we walked through it from
+	 * cgroup_enable_task_cg_lists(), then use_task_css_set_links value
+	 * should be visible now due to the paired locking and barriers implied
+	 * by LOCK/UNLOCK: it is written before the tasklist_lock unlock
+	 * in cgroup_enable_task_cg_lists() and read here after the tasklist_lock
+	 * lock on fork.
+	 */
 	if (use_task_css_set_links) {
 		write_lock(&css_set_lock);
 		if (list_empty(&child->cg_list)) {
-- 
1.7.5.4

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/