linux-kernel - [PATCH 4.2.y-ckt 304/305] sched/core: Reset task's lockless wake-queues on fork()

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:	Fri, 15 Jan 2016 16:01:58 -0800
From:	Kamal Mostafa <kamal@...onical.com>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
	kernel-team@...ts.ubuntu.com
Cc:	Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
	"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@...e.de>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Kamal Mostafa <kamal@...onical.com>
Subject: [PATCH 4.2.y-ckt 304/305] sched/core: Reset task's lockless wake-queues on fork()

4.2.8-ckt2 -stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

---8<------------------------------------------------------------

From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>

commit 093e5840ae76f1082633503964d035f40ed0216d upstream.

In the following commit:

  7675104990ed ("sched: Implement lockless wake-queues")

we gained lockless wake-queues.

The -RT kernel managed to lockup itself with those. There could be multiple
attempts for task X to enqueue it for a wakeup _even_ if task X is already
running.

The reason is that task X could be runnable but not yet on CPU. The the
task performing the wakeup did not leave the CPU it could performe
multiple wakeups.

With the proper timming task X could be running and enqueued for a
wakeup. If this happens while X is performing a fork() then its its
child will have a !NULL `wake_q` member copied.

This is not a problem as long as the child task does not participate in
lockless wakeups :)

Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@...e.de>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Fixes: 7675104990ed ("sched: Implement lockless wake-queues")
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20151221171710.GA5499@linutronix.de
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Signed-off-by: Kamal Mostafa <kamal@...onical.com>
---
 kernel/fork.c | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/kernel/fork.c b/kernel/fork.c
index e769c8c..a0fb0ce 100644
--- a/kernel/fork.c
+++ b/kernel/fork.c
@@ -379,6 +379,7 @@ static struct task_struct *dup_task_struct(struct task_struct *orig)
 #endif
 	tsk->splice_pipe = NULL;
 	tsk->task_frag.page = NULL;
+	tsk->wake_q.next = NULL;
 
 	account_kernel_stack(ti, 1);
 
-- 
1.9.1