[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200806231355.39329.rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2008 13:55:38 +1000
From: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
Hidehiro Kawai <hidehiro.kawai.ez@...achi.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-testers@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, sugita <yumiko.sugita.yf@...achi.com>,
Satoshi OSHIMA <satoshi.oshima.fk@...achi.com>
Subject: Re: [BUG][PATCH -mm] avoid BUG() in __stop_machine_run()
On Friday 20 June 2008 23:21:10 Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org> wrote:
> >> This simply introduces a flag to allow us to disable the capability
> >> checks for internal callers (this is simpler than splitting the
> >> sched_setscheduler() function, since it loops checking permissions).
> >
> > What about?
> >
> > int sched_setscheduler(struct task_struct *p, int policy,
> > struct sched_param *param)
> > {
> > return __sched_setscheduler(p, policy, param, true);
> > }
> >
> >
> > int sched_setscheduler_nocheck(struct task_struct *p, int policy,
> > struct sched_param *param)
> > {
> > return __sched_setscheduler(p, policy, param, false);
> > }
> >
> >
> > (With the appropriate transformation of sched_setscheduler -> __)
> >
> > Better than scattering stray true/falses around the code.
>
> agreed - it would also be less intrusive on the API change side.
Yes, here's the patch. I've put it in my tree for testing, too.
sched_setscheduler_nocheck: add a flag to control access checks
Hidehiro Kawai noticed that sched_setscheduler() can fail in
stop_machine: it calls sched_setscheduler() from insmod, which can
have CAP_SYS_MODULE without CAP_SYS_NICE.
Two cases could have failed, so are changed to sched_setscheduler_nocheck:
kernel/softirq.c:cpu_callback()
- CPU hotplug callback
kernel/stop_machine.c:__stop_machine_run()
- Called from various places, including modprobe()
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
diff -r 91c45b8d7775 include/linux/sched.h
--- a/include/linux/sched.h Mon Jun 23 13:49:26 2008 +1000
+++ b/include/linux/sched.h Mon Jun 23 13:54:55 2008 +1000
@@ -1655,6 +1655,8 @@ extern int task_curr(const struct task_s
extern int task_curr(const struct task_struct *p);
extern int idle_cpu(int cpu);
extern int sched_setscheduler(struct task_struct *, int, struct sched_param *);
+extern int sched_setscheduler_nocheck(struct task_struct *, int,
+ struct sched_param *);
extern struct task_struct *idle_task(int cpu);
extern struct task_struct *curr_task(int cpu);
extern void set_curr_task(int cpu, struct task_struct *p);
diff -r 91c45b8d7775 kernel/sched.c
--- a/kernel/sched.c Mon Jun 23 13:49:26 2008 +1000
+++ b/kernel/sched.c Mon Jun 23 13:54:55 2008 +1000
@@ -4744,16 +4744,8 @@ __setscheduler(struct rq *rq, struct tas
set_load_weight(p);
}
-/**
- * sched_setscheduler - change the scheduling policy and/or RT priority of a thread.
- * @p: the task in question.
- * @policy: new policy.
- * @param: structure containing the new RT priority.
- *
- * NOTE that the task may be already dead.
- */
-int sched_setscheduler(struct task_struct *p, int policy,
- struct sched_param *param)
+static int __sched_setscheduler(struct task_struct *p, int policy,
+ struct sched_param *param, bool user)
{
int retval, oldprio, oldpolicy = -1, on_rq, running;
unsigned long flags;
@@ -4785,7 +4777,7 @@ recheck:
/*
* Allow unprivileged RT tasks to decrease priority:
*/
- if (!capable(CAP_SYS_NICE)) {
+ if (user && !capable(CAP_SYS_NICE)) {
if (rt_policy(policy)) {
unsigned long rlim_rtprio;
@@ -4821,7 +4813,8 @@ recheck:
* Do not allow realtime tasks into groups that have no runtime
* assigned.
*/
- if (rt_policy(policy) && task_group(p)->rt_bandwidth.rt_runtime == 0)
+ if (user
+ && rt_policy(policy) && task_group(p)->rt_bandwidth.rt_runtime == 0)
return -EPERM;
#endif
@@ -4870,7 +4863,38 @@ recheck:
return 0;
}
+
+/**
+ * sched_setscheduler - change the scheduling policy and/or RT priority of a thread.
+ * @p: the task in question.
+ * @policy: new policy.
+ * @param: structure containing the new RT priority.
+ *
+ * NOTE that the task may be already dead.
+ */
+int sched_setscheduler(struct task_struct *p, int policy,
+ struct sched_param *param)
+{
+ return __sched_setscheduler(p, policy, param, true);
+}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(sched_setscheduler);
+
+/**
+ * sched_setscheduler_nocheck - change the scheduling policy and/or RT priority of a thread
from kernelspace.
+ * @p: the task in question.
+ * @policy: new policy.
+ * @param: structure containing the new RT priority.
+ *
+ * Just like sched_setscheduler, only don't bother checking if the
+ * current context has permission. For example, this is needed in
+ * stop_machine(): we create temporary high priority worker threads,
+ * but our caller might not have that capability.
+ */
+int sched_setscheduler_nocheck(struct task_struct *p, int policy,
+ struct sched_param *param)
+{
+ return __sched_setscheduler(p, policy, param, false);
+}
static int
do_sched_setscheduler(pid_t pid, int policy, struct sched_param __user *param)
diff -r 91c45b8d7775 kernel/softirq.c
--- a/kernel/softirq.c Mon Jun 23 13:49:26 2008 +1000
+++ b/kernel/softirq.c Mon Jun 23 13:54:55 2008 +1000
@@ -645,7 +645,7 @@ static int __cpuinit cpu_callback(struct
p = per_cpu(ksoftirqd, hotcpu);
per_cpu(ksoftirqd, hotcpu) = NULL;
- sched_setscheduler(p, SCHED_FIFO, ¶m);
+ sched_setscheduler_nocheck(p, SCHED_FIFO, ¶m);
kthread_stop(p);
takeover_tasklets(hotcpu);
break;
diff -r 91c45b8d7775 kernel/stop_machine.c
--- a/kernel/stop_machine.c Mon Jun 23 13:49:26 2008 +1000
+++ b/kernel/stop_machine.c Mon Jun 23 13:54:55 2008 +1000
@@ -187,7 +187,7 @@ struct task_struct *__stop_machine_run(i
struct sched_param param = { .sched_priority = MAX_RT_PRIO-1 };
/* One high-prio thread per cpu. We'll do this one. */
- sched_setscheduler(p, SCHED_FIFO, ¶m);
+ sched_setscheduler_nocheck(p, SCHED_FIFO, ¶m);
kthread_bind(p, cpu);
wake_up_process(p);
wait_for_completion(&smdata.done);
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists