[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20231026070310.GY3359458@pengutronix.de>
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2023 09:03:10 +0200
From: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>
To: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
kernel@...gutronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: Do not break out of sk_stream_wait_memory() with
TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 03:56:17PM +0200, Paolo Abeni wrote:
> On Mon, 2023-10-23 at 14:13 +0200, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> > It can happen that a socket sends the remaining data at close() time.
> > With io_uring and KTLS it can happen that sk_stream_wait_memory() bails
> > out with -512 (-ERESTARTSYS) because TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL is set for the
> > current task. This flag has been set in io_req_normal_work_add() by
> > calling task_work_add().
> >
> > It seems signal_pending() is too broad, so this patch replaces it with
> > task_sigpending(), thus ignoring the TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL flag.
>
> This looks dangerous, at best. Other possible legit users setting
> TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL will be broken.
>
> Can't you instead clear TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL in io_run_task_work() ?
I don't have an idea how io_run_task_work() comes into play here, but it
seems it already clears TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL:
static inline int io_run_task_work(void)
{
/*
* Always check-and-clear the task_work notification signal. With how
* signaling works for task_work, we can find it set with nothing to
* run. We need to clear it for that case, like get_signal() does.
*/
if (test_thread_flag(TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL))
clear_notify_signal();
...
}
Sascha
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
Powered by blists - more mailing lists