[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACVxJT9Cd6OzEh=YuFGdZ2JvWWGUShXXAr8Wq8sE7G74mt_mFQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 16:46:26 +0300
From: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
To: Jan Stancek <jstancek@...hat.com>
Cc: Jarod Wilson <jwilson@...hat.com>, Jarod Wilson <jarod@...hat.com>,
"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH try #4] proc: fix PAGE_SIZE limit of /proc/$PID/cmdline
On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 1:56 PM, Jan Stancek <jstancek@...hat.com> wrote:
> On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 01:27:13AM -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote:
>> On May 26, 2015, at 5:24 PM, Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com> wrote:
>> >> Should have tested on more than just x86, it appears. We've started
>> >> hammering on this internally across all arches, and its exploded
>> >> multiple times on ppc64 now:
>> >>
>> >> [ 2717.074699] ------------[ cut here ]------------
>> >> [ 2717.074787] kernel BUG at fs/proc/base.c:244!
>> >
>> >> OE-------------- 3.10.0-255.el7.ppc64.debug #1
>> >
>> > Which BUG_ON is this?
>> >
>> > BUG_ON(*pos < 0);
>> > BUG_ON(arg_start > arg_end);
>> > BUG_ON(env_start > env_end);
>>
>
> Is create_elf_tables() taking mm->mmap_sem when it's initialising env_start/end?
No, and it wasn't needed before checkpoint/restart (prctl(PR_SET_MM ...)).
Fields were write-once, now they aren't. C/R is doing down_read() in
prctl_set_mm()
which is an obvious bug.
Check "if (!mm->arg_end)" is safeguard exactly against new process not having
ARGV/ENVP fields completely initialized. I didn't understand what it
does exactly,
now it's clear.
--
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