linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] audit: wait_for_auditd() should use TASK

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 31 May 2013 19:10:25 +0200
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	Guy Streeter <streeter@...hat.com>,
	Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] audit: wait_for_auditd() should use
	TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE

On 05/29, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> On Fri, 24 May 2013 19:39:25 +0200 Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> > audit_log_start() does wait_for_auditd() in a loop until
> > audit_backlog_wait_time passes or audit_skb_queue has a room.
> >
> > If signal_pending() is true this becomes a busy-wait loop,
> > schedule() in TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE won't block.
>
> And that's game over for a uniprocessor non-preempt machine, yes?

If this task is rt, yes. Otherwise schedule() still does pick_next_task()
but this is obviously bad anyway. So I fully agree with "Cc: stable" you
added.

> > Reported-by: Guy Streeter <streeter@...hat.com>
>
> And what did Guy report?  "that looks screwy"?  "my machine locked up"?

He also investigated the problem and provided the detailed explanation ;)

Oleg.

--
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/