linux-kernel - Re: finish_task_switch && prev_state (Was: sched, timers: use after free in __lock_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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20140715142525.GA26029@redhat.com>
Date:	Tue, 15 Jul 2014 16:25:25 +0200
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
	Andrey Ryabinin <a.ryabinin@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: finish_task_switch && prev_state (Was: sched, timers: use
	after free in __lock_task_sighand when exiting a process)

On 07/15, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> @@ -2211,13 +2211,15 @@ static void finish_task_switch(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev)
>  
>  	/*
>  	 * A task struct has one reference for the use as "current".
> +	 *
>  	 * If a task dies, then it sets TASK_DEAD in tsk->state and calls
> -	 * schedule one last time. The schedule call will never return, and
> -	 * the scheduled task must drop that reference.
> -	 * The test for TASK_DEAD must occur while the runqueue locks are
> -	 * still held, otherwise prev could be scheduled on another cpu, die
> -	 * there before we look at prev->state, and then the reference would
> -	 * be dropped twice.
> +	 * schedule one last time. The schedule call will never return, and the
> +	 * scheduled task must drop that reference.
> +	 *
> +	 * The test for TASK_DEAD must occur while the runqueue locks are still
> +	 * held, otherwise we can race with RUNNING -> DEAD transitions, and
> +	 * then the reference would be dropped twice.
> +	 *
>  	 *		Manfred Spraul <manfred@...orfullife.com>
>  	 */

Agreed, this looks much more understandable!


And probably I missed something again, but it seems that this logic is broken
with __ARCH_WANT_UNLOCKED_CTXSW.

Of course, even if I am right this is pure theoretical, but smp_wmb() before
"->on_cpu = 0" is not enough and we need a full barrier ?

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/