[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZnFGy2nYI9XZSvMl@tiehlicka>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2024 10:35:23 +0200
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
To: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@...il.com>, Yu Ma <yu.ma@...el.com>,
viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, brauner@...nel.org, jack@...e.cz,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
tim.c.chen@...el.com, pan.deng@...el.com, tianyou.li@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] fs/file.c: move sanity_check from alloc_fd() to
put_unused_fd()
On Mon 17-06-24 11:04:41, Tim Chen wrote:
> diff --git a/kernel/sys.c b/kernel/sys.c
> index 3a2df1bd9f64..b4e523728c3e 100644
> --- a/kernel/sys.c
> +++ b/kernel/sys.c
> @@ -1471,6 +1471,7 @@ static int do_prlimit(struct task_struct *tsk, unsigned int resource,
> return -EINVAL;
> resource = array_index_nospec(resource, RLIM_NLIMITS);
>
> + task_lock(tsk->group_leader);
> if (new_rlim) {
> if (new_rlim->rlim_cur > new_rlim->rlim_max)
> return -EINVAL;
This is clearly broken as it leaves the lock behind on the error, no?
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists