linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] signal.c: Fix sparse warnings

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: <20200205165138.GB22537@workstation-portable>
Date:   Wed, 5 Feb 2020 22:21:38 +0530
From:   Amol Grover <frextrite@...il.com>
To:     madhuparnabhowmik10@...il.com
Cc:     ebiederm@...ssion.com, oleg@...hat.com,
        christian.brauner@...ntu.com, guro@...com, tj@...nel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, paulmck@...nel.org,
        joel@...lfernandes.org,
        linux-kernel-mentees@...ts.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] signal.c: Fix sparse warnings

On Wed, Feb 05, 2020 at 09:53:19PM +0530, madhuparnabhowmik10@...il.com wrote:
> From: Madhuparna Bhowmik <madhuparnabhowmik10@...il.com>
> 
> This patch fixes the following two sparse warnings caused due to
> accessing RCU protected pointer tsk->parent without rcu primitives.
> 
> kernel/signal.c:1948:65: warning: incorrect type in argument 1 (different address spaces)
> kernel/signal.c:1948:65:    expected struct task_struct *tsk
> kernel/signal.c:1948:65:    got struct task_struct [noderef] <asn:4> *parent
> kernel/signal.c:1949:40: warning: incorrect type in argument 1 (different address spaces)
> kernel/signal.c:1949:40:    expected void const volatile *p
> kernel/signal.c:1949:40:    got struct cred const [noderef] <asn:4> *[noderef] <asn:4> *
> kernel/signal.c:1949:40: warning: incorrect type in argument 1 (different address spaces)
> kernel/signal.c:1949:40:    expected void const volatile *p
> kernel/signal.c:1949:40:    got struct cred const [noderef] <asn:4> *[noderef] <asn:4> *
> 
> Signed-off-by: Madhuparna Bhowmik <madhuparnabhowmik10@...il.com>
> ---
>  kernel/signal.c | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/signal.c b/kernel/signal.c
> index 9ad8dea93dbb..3d59e5652d94 100644
> --- a/kernel/signal.c
> +++ b/kernel/signal.c
> @@ -1945,8 +1945,8 @@ bool do_notify_parent(struct task_struct *tsk, int sig)
>  	 * correct to rely on this
>  	 */
>  	rcu_read_lock();
> -	info.si_pid = task_pid_nr_ns(tsk, task_active_pid_ns(tsk->parent));
> -	info.si_uid = from_kuid_munged(task_cred_xxx(tsk->parent, user_ns),
> +	info.si_pid = task_pid_nr_ns(tsk, task_active_pid_ns(rcu_access_pointer(tsk->parent)));
> +	info.si_uid = from_kuid_munged(task_cred_xxx(rcu_access_pointer(tsk->parent), user_ns),

Shouldn't rcu_dereference() OR rcu_dereference_check() be better suited
here? Since, rcu_access_pointer() omits all lockdep checks.

Thanks
Amol

>  				       task_uid(tsk));
>  	rcu_read_unlock();
>  
> -- 
> 2.17.1
>