linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] account_group_exec_runtime: fix the racy usage of ->signal

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Fri, 7 Nov 2008 18:40:16 +0100
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, adobriyan@...il.com,
	Doug Chapman <doug.chapman@...com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] account_group_exec_runtime: fix the racy usage of
	->signal

On 11/07, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> > --- K-28/kernel/sched_stats.h~A_G_E_R_FIX	2008-11-07 17:32:02.000000000 +0100
> > +++ K-28/kernel/sched_stats.h	2008-11-07 17:44:39.000000000 +0100
> > @@ -351,10 +351,12 @@ static inline void account_group_exec_ru
> >  					      unsigned long long ns)
> >  {
> >  	struct signal_struct *sig;
> > +	unsigned long flags;
> >
> > -	sig = tsk->signal;
> > -	if (unlikely(!sig))
> > +	if (unlikely(!lock_task_sighand(tsk, &flags)))
> >  		return;
>
> i think this will lock up:

Ah. I worried about this, but convinced myself this is OK...

> the signal lock must not nest inside the rq
> lock, and these accounting functions are called from within the
> scheduler.

Why? we seem to never do task_rq_lock() under ->siglock ?

Oleg.

--
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/