[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <878saih2op.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org>
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2020 16:58:46 -0600
From: ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Subject: [PATCH] exec: Move io_uring_task_cancel after the point of no return
Now that unshare_files happens in begin_new_exec after the point of no
return, io_uring_task_cancel can also happen later.
Effectively this means io_uring activities for a task are only canceled
when exec succeeds.
Signed-off-by: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
---
This is against my exec-for-v5.11 branch
fs/exec.c | 10 +++++-----
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/exec.c b/fs/exec.c
index 14fae2ec1c9d..9e9368603168 100644
--- a/fs/exec.c
+++ b/fs/exec.c
@@ -1257,6 +1257,11 @@ int begin_new_exec(struct linux_binprm * bprm)
if (retval)
goto out;
+ /*
+ * Cancel any io_uring activity across execve
+ */
+ io_uring_task_cancel();
+
/* Ensure the files table is not shared. */
retval = unshare_files();
if (retval)
@@ -1783,11 +1788,6 @@ static int bprm_execve(struct linux_binprm *bprm,
struct file *file;
int retval;
- /*
- * Cancel any io_uring activity across execve
- */
- io_uring_task_cancel();
-
retval = prepare_bprm_creds(bprm);
if (retval)
return retval;
--
2.20.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists