linux-kernel - [PATCH] for account_group_exec_runtime(), make sure ->signal can't be freed under rq->lock

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20081110143930.GA28275@redhat.com>
Date:	Mon, 10 Nov 2008 15:39:30 +0100
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	adobriyan@...il.com, Doug Chapman <doug.chapman@...com>,
	Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH] for account_group_exec_runtime(), make sure ->signal can't
	be freed under rq->lock

The patch is ugly, but I don't see the better fix for now. Needs
the review from Peter/Ingo.

Unlike other similar routines, account_group_exec_runtime() could be
called "implicitly" from within scheduler after exit_notify(). This
means we can race with the parent doing release_task(), we can't just
check ->signal != NULL.

Change __exit_signal() to do spin_unlock_wait(&task_rq(tsk)->lock)
before __cleanup_signal() to make sure ->signal can't be freed under
task_rq(tsk)->lock. Note that task_rq_unlock_wait() doesn't care
about the case when tsk changes cpu/rq under us, this should be OK.

Thanks to Ingo who nacked my previous buggy patch.

Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Reported-by: Doug Chapman <doug.chapman@...com>

--- K-28/include/linux/sched.h~SIG_RQ_LOCK	2008-11-06 19:12:44.000000000 +0100
+++ K-28/include/linux/sched.h	2008-11-10 13:13:07.000000000 +0100
@@ -247,6 +247,7 @@ extern void init_idle(struct task_struct
 extern void init_idle_bootup_task(struct task_struct *idle);
 
 extern int runqueue_is_locked(void);
+extern void task_rq_unlock_wait(struct task_struct *p);
 
 extern cpumask_t nohz_cpu_mask;
 #if defined(CONFIG_SMP) && defined(CONFIG_NO_HZ)
--- K-28/kernel/sched.c~SIG_RQ_LOCK	2008-11-06 19:12:44.000000000 +0100
+++ K-28/kernel/sched.c	2008-11-10 13:05:09.000000000 +0100
@@ -969,6 +969,14 @@ static struct rq *task_rq_lock(struct ta
 	}
 }
 
+void task_rq_unlock_wait(struct task_struct *p)
+{
+	struct rq *rq = task_rq(p);
+
+	smp_mb();
+	spin_unlock_wait(&rq->lock);
+}
+
 static void __task_rq_unlock(struct rq *rq)
 	__releases(rq->lock)
 {
--- K-28/kernel/exit.c~SIG_RQ_LOCK	2008-11-06 19:11:02.000000000 +0100
+++ K-28/kernel/exit.c	2008-11-10 15:07:22.000000000 +0100
@@ -141,6 +141,11 @@ static void __exit_signal(struct task_st
 	if (sig) {
 		flush_sigqueue(&sig->shared_pending);
 		taskstats_tgid_free(sig);
+		/*
+		 * Make sure ->signal can't go away under rq->lock,
+		 * see account_group_exec_runtime().
+		 */
+		task_rq_unlock_wait(tsk);
 		__cleanup_signal(sig);
 	}
 }

--
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/