[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200912100229.nBA2TfTH008226@www262.sakura.ne.jp>
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2009 11:29:41 +0900
From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>
To: paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [patch 1/9] sys: Fix missing rcu protection for __task_cred() access
> As a rough rule of thumb, any dereference of an RCU-protected
> pointer must be covered by rcu_read_lock() or rcu_read_lock_bh()
> or by the appropriate update-side lock.
Does this mean that we need both rcu_read_lock() *and*
read_lock(&tasklist_lock) when calling find_task_by_vpid() because pid_task()
uses rcu_dereference() and find_pid_ns() uses hlist_for_each_entry_rcu ?
378 /*
379 * Must be called under rcu_read_lock() or with tasklist_lock read-held.
380 */
381 struct task_struct *find_task_by_pid_ns(pid_t nr, struct pid_namespace *ns)
382 {
383 return pid_task(find_pid_ns(nr, ns), PIDTYPE_PID);
384 }
385
386 struct task_struct *find_task_by_vpid(pid_t vnr)
387 {
388 return find_task_by_pid_ns(vnr, current->nsproxy->pid_ns);
389 }
--
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