[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250802022550.GT222315@ZenIV>
Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2025 03:25:50 +0100
From: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
To: Xiang Gao <gxxa03070307@...il.com>
Cc: brauner@...nel.org, oleg@...hat.com, mjguzik@...il.com,
Liam.Howlett@...cle.com, joel.granados@...nel.org,
lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
gaoxiang17 <gaoxiang17@...omi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pid: Add a judgment for ns null in pid_nr_ns
On Sat, Aug 02, 2025 at 10:21:23AM +0800, Xiang Gao wrote:
> From: gaoxiang17 <gaoxiang17@...omi.com>
>
> __task_pid_nr_ns
> ns = task_active_pid_ns(current);
> pid_nr_ns(rcu_dereference(*task_pid_ptr(task, type)), ns);
> if (pid && ns->level <= pid->level) {
>
> Sometimes null is returned for task_active_pid_ns. Then it will trigger kernel panic in pid_nr_ns.
In which conditions does that happen?
> __task_pid_nr_ns+0x74/0xd0
> ...
> __handle_irq_event_percpu+0xd4/0x284
> handle_irq_event+0x48/0xb0
Huh? Just what is it doing inside an IRQ handler?
Hell, the notion of current process is not usable in those,
let alone any properties of such...
Details, please.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists