[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <lsq.1544392233.639849846@decadent.org.uk>
Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2018 21:50:33 +0000
From: Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org
CC: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, "Oleg Nesterov" <oleg@...hat.com>,
"Steven Rostedt (VMware)" <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: [PATCH 3.16 126/328] uprobes: Use synchronize_rcu() not
synchronize_sched()
3.16.62-rc1 review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: "Steven Rostedt (VMware)" <rostedt@...dmis.org>
commit 016f8ffc48cb01d1e7701649c728c5d2e737d295 upstream.
While debugging another bug, I was looking at all the synchronize*()
functions being used in kernel/trace, and noticed that trace_uprobes was
using synchronize_sched(), with a comment to synchronize with
{u,ret}_probe_trace_func(). When looking at those functions, the data is
protected with "rcu_read_lock()" and not with "rcu_read_lock_sched()". This
is using the wrong synchronize_*() function.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180809160553.469e1e32@gandalf.local.home
Fixes: 70ed91c6ec7f8 ("tracing/uprobes: Support ftrace_event_file base multibuffer")
Acked-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt (VMware) <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>
---
kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
--- a/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c
+++ b/kernel/trace/trace_uprobe.c
@@ -949,7 +949,7 @@ probe_event_disable(struct trace_uprobe
list_del_rcu(&link->list);
/* synchronize with u{,ret}probe_trace_func */
- synchronize_sched();
+ synchronize_rcu();
kfree(link);
if (!list_empty(&tu->tp.files))
Powered by blists - more mailing lists