[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87aayy6j8b.fsf@basil.nowhere.org>
Date: Sat, 07 Nov 2009 23:52:20 +0100
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: john stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Mike Fulton <fultonm@...ibm.com>,
Sean Foley <Sean_Foley@...ibm.com>,
Darren Hart <dvhltc@...ibm.com>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Allow threads to rename siblings via /proc/pid/tasks/tid/comm
john stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com> writes:
> - strlcpy(tsk->comm, buf, sizeof(tsk->comm));
> +
> + /*
> + * Threads may access current->comm without holding
> + * the task lock, so write the string carefully
> + * to avoid non-terminating reads. Readers without a lock
> + * will get the oldname, the newname or an empty string.
> + */
> + tsk->comm[0] = 0;
> + wmb();
> + strlcpy(tsk->comm+1, buf+1, sizeof(tsk->comm)-1);
> + wmb();
> + tsk->comm[0] = buf[0];
Is this really safe?
reader writer
read comm[0]
set comm[0] to 0
overwrites comm[1]
read comm[1]
read comm[2]
writes comm[2] to 0
read comm[3]
...
goes beyond the end
Better way probably is to replace tsk->comm with a pointer
and exchange that using xchg. Drawback: 4-8 bytes more per task.
Or perhaps make comm one byte longer and make sure the last
byte is always 0, but the drawback is that a reader can
read random (but at least safe) junk then.
-Andi
--
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
--
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