linux-kernel - Re: [2.6.37-rc1] sys_ioprio

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

Message-ID: <20101108135204.GE2580@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:	Mon, 8 Nov 2010 05:52:04 -0800
From:	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Jens Axboe <jaxboe@...ionio.com>
Cc:	Daniel J Blueman <daniel.blueman@...il.com>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [2.6.37-rc1] sys_ioprio_set and RCU locking...

On Mon, Nov 08, 2010 at 02:28:29PM +0100, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 2010-11-07 19:54, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 02, 2010 at 12:15:30PM +0000, Daniel J Blueman wrote:
> >> With 2.6.37-rc1, I observe sys_ioprio_set not taking the RCU lock [1]
> >> across access to the task credentials.
> >>
> >> Inspecting the code in fs/ioprio.c, the tasklist_lock is held for read
> >> across the __task_cred call, which is presumably sufficient to prevent
> >> the task credentials becoming stale.
> >>
> >> Thus, is there preference to take the RCU lock for read across the
> >> credential access eg at [2], or annotate the call?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>   Daniel
> >>
> >> --- [1]
> >>
> >> ===================================================
> >>
> >> [ INFO: suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage. ]
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >> kernel/pid.c:419 invoked rcu_dereference_check() without protection!
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> other info that might help us debug this:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> rcu_scheduler_active = 1, debug_locks = 1
> >>
> >> 1 lock held by start-stop-daem/2246:
> >>
> >>  #0:  (tasklist_lock){.?.?..}, at: [<ffffffff811a2dfa>]
> >> sys_ioprio_set+0x8a/0x400
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> stack backtrace:
> >>
> >> Pid: 2246, comm: start-stop-daem Not tainted 2.6.37-rc1-330cd+ #2
> >>
> >> Call Trace:
> >>
> >>  [<ffffffff8109f5f4>] lockdep_rcu_dereference+0xa4/0xc0
> >>
> >>  [<ffffffff81085651>] find_task_by_pid_ns+0x81/0x90
> >>
> >>  [<ffffffff8108567d>] find_task_by_vpid+0x1d/0x20
> >>
> >>  [<ffffffff811a3160>] sys_ioprio_set+0x3f0/0x400
> >>
> >>  [<ffffffff816efa79>] ? trace_hardirqs_on_thunk+0x3a/0x3f
> >>
> >>  [<ffffffff81003482>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
> >>
> >>
> >> --- [2]
> >>
> >> Take the RCU lock for read across acquiring the pointer to the task
> >> credentials and dereferencing it.
> > 
> > Jens, does this look sane?
> 
> Yes, looks clean enough to me.

Very good!  Are you willing to take the patch in your tree?

							Thanx, Paul
--
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/