linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] fs: process fput task_work with TWA

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: <20210108052651.GM3579531@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date:   Fri, 8 Jan 2021 05:26:51 +0000
From:   Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
To:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc:     linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
        Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs: process fput task_work with TWA_SIGNAL

On Tue, Jan 05, 2021 at 11:29:11AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
> Song reported a boot regression in a kvm image with 5.11-rc, and bisected
> it down to the below patch. Debugging this issue, turns out that the boot
> stalled when a task is waiting on a pipe being released. As we no longer
> run task_work from get_signal() unless it's queued with TWA_SIGNAL, the
> task goes idle without running the task_work. This prevents ->release()
> from being called on the pipe, which another boot task is waiting on.
> 
> Use TWA_SIGNAL for the file fput work to ensure it's run before the task
> goes idle.
> 
> Fixes: 98b89b649fce ("signal: kill JOBCTL_TASK_WORK")
> Reported-by: Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>
> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
> 
> ---
> 
> The other alternative here is obviously to re-instate the:
> 
> if (unlikely(current->task_works))
> 	task_work_run();
> 
> in get_signal() that we had before this change. Might be safer in case
> there are other cases that need to ensure the work is run in a timely
> fashion, though I do think it's cleaner to long term to correctly mark
> task_work with the needed notification type. Comments welcome...

Interesting...  I think I've missed the discussion of that thing; could
you forward the relevant thread my way or give an archive link to it?