[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210622063405.GA7570@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2021 08:34:06 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: syzbot <syzbot+0bac5fec63d4f399ba98@...kaller.appspotmail.com>,
axboe@...nel.dk, christian@...uner.io, ebiederm@...ssion.com,
elver@...gle.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, pcc@...gle.com,
peterz@...radead.org, syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] signal: Prevent sigqueue caching after task got released
On 06/22, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
> syzbot reported a memory leak related to sigqueue caching. This happens
> when a thread group leader with child tasks is reaped.
>
> The group leader's sigqueue_cache is correctly freed. The group leader then
> reaps the child tasks and if any of them has a signal pending it caches
> that signal.
I guess you mean the race with exit_notify() ? Could you spell please?
I am just curious how exactly this problem was found.
This doesn't really matter, because damn yes, a task T can call
release_task(another_task)->sigqueue_cache_or_free() after
exit_task_sigqueue_cache(T) was already called. For example, a last non-leader
thread exits and reaps a zombie leader.
Somehow I thought that exit_task_sigqueue_cache() at the end of __exit_signal()
should fix this problem, but this is obviously wrong.
> @@ -463,13 +469,18 @@ void exit_task_sigqueue_cache(struct tas
> struct sigqueue *q = tsk->sigqueue_cache;
>
> if (q) {
> - tsk->sigqueue_cache = NULL;
> /*
> * Hand it back to the cache as the task might
> * be self reaping which would leak the object.
> */
> kmem_cache_free(sigqueue_cachep, q);
> }
> +
> + /*
> + * Set an error pointer to ensure that @tsk will not cache a
> + * sigqueue when it is reaping it's child tasks
> + */
> + tsk->sigqueue_cache = ERR_PTR(-1);
> }
Reviewed-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists