linux-kernel - [PATCH pm-freezer 3/4] freezer: restructure _

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]

Message-ID: <20110831102210.GC2828@mtj.dyndns.org>
Date:	Wed, 31 Aug 2011 12:22:10 +0200
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Paul Menage <paul@...lmenage.org>
Cc:	containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH pm-freezer 3/4] freezer: restructure __refrigerator()


If another freeze happens before all tasks leave FROZEN state after
being thawed, the freezer can see the existing FROZEN and consider the
tasks to be frozen but they can clear FROZEN without checking the new
freezing().

Oleg suggested restructuring __refrigerator() such that there's single
condition check section inside freezer_lock and sigpending is cleared
afterwards, which fixes the problem and simplifies the code.
Restructure accordingly.

Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Reported-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
---
 kernel/freezer.c |   33 ++++++++++++++-------------------
 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)

Index: work/kernel/freezer.c
===================================================================
--- work.orig/kernel/freezer.c
+++ work/kernel/freezer.c
@@ -52,36 +52,31 @@ bool __refrigerator(bool check_kthr_stop
 	/* Hmm, should we be allowed to suspend when there are realtime
 	   processes around? */
 	bool was_frozen = false;
-	long save;
+	long save = current->state;
 
-	/*
-	 * No point in checking freezing() again - the caller already did.
-	 * Proceed to enter FROZEN.
-	 */
-	spin_lock_irq(&freezer_lock);
-	current->flags |= PF_FROZEN;
-	spin_unlock_irq(&freezer_lock);
-
-	save = current->state;
 	pr_debug("%s entered refrigerator\n", current->comm);
 
-	spin_lock_irq(&current->sighand->siglock);
-	recalc_sigpending(); /* We sent fake signal, clean it up */
-	spin_unlock_irq(&current->sighand->siglock);
-
 	for (;;) {
 		set_current_state(TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
+
+		spin_lock_irq(&freezer_lock);
+		current->flags |= PF_FROZEN;
 		if (!freezing(current) ||
-		    (check_kthr_stop && kthread_should_stop()))
+		    (check_kthr_stop && kthread_should_stop())) {
+			current->flags &= ~PF_FROZEN;
+			break;
+		}
+		spin_unlock_irq(&freezer_lock);
+
+		if (!(current->flags & PF_FROZEN))
 			break;
 		was_frozen = true;
 		schedule();
 	}
 
-	/* leave FROZEN */
-	spin_lock_irq(&freezer_lock);
-	current->flags &= ~PF_FROZEN;
-	spin_unlock_irq(&freezer_lock);
+	spin_lock_irq(&current->sighand->siglock);
+	recalc_sigpending(); /* We sent fake signal, clean it up */
+	spin_unlock_irq(&current->sighand->siglock);
 
 	pr_debug("%s left refrigerator\n", current->comm);
 
--
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/