linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] cgroup: Properly init nr_tasks in cgroup

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, 15 Sep 2017 11:28:35 -0700
From:   Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
To:     Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:     Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cgroup: Properly init nr_tasks in cgroup_taskset

On 09/15/2017 08:47 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Waiman.
>
> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 01:45:13PM -0700, Waiman Long wrote:
>> Commit 610467270fb3 ("cgroup: don't call migration methods if there
>> are no tasks to migrate") introduces a new field nr_tasks to the
>> cgroup_taskset structure for keeping track of the number of tasks
>> contained in the structure.  The initial value of this field, however,
>> is not guaranteed to be 0 as all the cgroup_taskset structures are
>> allocated from stack.  Therefore, we need to explicitly initilized
>> it in the CGROUP_TASKSET_INIT() macro for the new code to behave
>> correctly.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
>> ---
>>  kernel/cgroup/cgroup-internal.h | 1 +
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/cgroup/cgroup-internal.h b/kernel/cgroup/cgroup-internal.h
>> index 5151ff2..6b4c04e 100644
>> --- a/kernel/cgroup/cgroup-internal.h
>> +++ b/kernel/cgroup/cgroup-internal.h
>> @@ -76,6 +76,7 @@ struct cgroup_mgctx {
>>  	.src_csets		= LIST_HEAD_INIT(tset.src_csets),		\
>>  	.dst_csets		= LIST_HEAD_INIT(tset.dst_csets),		\
>>  	.csets			= &tset.src_csets,	Y			\
>> +	.nr_tasks		= 0,						\
> But it's an initialization macro, which means that the only way thhese
> are used is as a part of whole struct initialization and the compiler
> would always set the unspecified fields to zero.
>
> Thanks.
>
You are right. I checked the assembly code and it did initialize the
other fields of the structure to 0. So my fix is bogus.

I sent this patch out because our QE people were still seeing the same
panic in PPC machines even with your patch applied. So I mistakenly
thought maybe the structure initialization wasn't complete. I will have
to further into why this was still happening.

Sorry for bothering you.

Cheers,
Longman