[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20120824150804.8e3c4b7e.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2012 15:08:04 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>
Cc: <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] fork: fix oops after fork failure
On Thu, 23 Aug 2012 19:36:08 +0400
Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com> wrote:
> When we want to duplicate a new process, dup_task_struct() will undergo
> a series of allocations. If alloc_thread_info_node() fails, we call
> free_task_struct() and return.
>
> This seems right, but it is not. free_task_struct() will not only free
> the task struct from the kmem_cache, but will also call
> arch_release_task_struct(). The problem is that this function is
> supposed to undo whatever arch-specific work done by
> arch_dup_task_struct(), that is not yet called at this point. The
> particular problem I ran accross was that in x86, we will arrive at
> fpu_free() without having ever allocated it.
I think ths was already fixed by f19b9f74b7ea3b ("fork: fix error
handling in dup_task()"). As you would have noticed if you were
preparing patches against up-to-date kernel versions!
--
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