Patch "ptrace: fix race between ptrace_resume() and wait_task_stopped()" has been added to the 3.10-stable tree

[<gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>]

This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled

    ptrace: fix race between ptrace_resume() and wait_task_stopped()

to the 3.10-stable tree which can be found at:
    http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git;a=summary

The filename of the patch is:
     ptrace-fix-race-between-ptrace_resume-and-wait_task_stopped.patch
and it can be found in the queue-3.10 subdirectory.

If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable tree,
please let <stable@vger.kernel.org> know about it.


>From b72c186999e689cb0b055ab1c7b3cd8fffbeb5ed Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2015 12:47:29 -0700
Subject: ptrace: fix race between ptrace_resume() and wait_task_stopped()

From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>

commit b72c186999e689cb0b055ab1c7b3cd8fffbeb5ed upstream.

ptrace_resume() is called when the tracee is still __TASK_TRACED.  We set
tracee->exit_code and then wake_up_state() changes tracee->state.  If the
tracer's sub-thread does wait() in between, task_stopped_code(ptrace => T)
wrongly looks like another report from tracee.

This confuses debugger, and since wait_task_stopped() clears ->exit_code
the tracee can miss a signal.

Test-case:

	#include <stdio.h>
	#include <unistd.h>
	#include <sys/wait.h>
	#include <sys/ptrace.h>
	#include <pthread.h>
	#include <assert.h>

	int pid;

	void *waiter(void *arg)
	{
		int stat;

		for (;;) {
			assert(pid == wait(&stat));
			assert(WIFSTOPPED(stat));
			if (WSTOPSIG(stat) == SIGHUP)
				continue;

			assert(WSTOPSIG(stat) == SIGCONT);
			printf("ERR! extra/wrong report:%x\n", stat);
		}
	}

	int main(void)
	{
		pthread_t thread;

		pid = fork();
		if (!pid) {
			assert(ptrace(PTRACE_TRACEME, 0,0,0) == 0);
			for (;;)
				kill(getpid(), SIGHUP);
		}

		assert(pthread_create(&thread, NULL, waiter, NULL) == 0);

		for (;;)
			ptrace(PTRACE_CONT, pid, 0, SIGCONT);

		return 0;
	}

Note for stable: the bug is very old, but without 9899d11f6544 "ptrace:
ensure arch_ptrace/ptrace_request can never race with SIGKILL" the fix
should use lock_task_sighand(child).

Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Reported-by: Pavel Labath <labath@google.com>
Tested-by: Pavel Labath <labath@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>

---
 kernel/ptrace.c |   20 ++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+)

--- a/kernel/ptrace.c
+++ b/kernel/ptrace.c
@@ -720,6 +720,8 @@ static int ptrace_peek_siginfo(struct ta
 static int ptrace_resume(struct task_struct *child, long request,
 			 unsigned long data)
 {
+	bool need_siglock;
+
 	if (!valid_signal(data))
 		return -EIO;
 
@@ -747,8 +749,26 @@ static int ptrace_resume(struct task_str
 		user_disable_single_step(child);
 	}
 
+	/*
+	 * Change ->exit_code and ->state under siglock to avoid the race
+	 * with wait_task_stopped() in between; a non-zero ->exit_code will
+	 * wrongly look like another report from tracee.
+	 *
+	 * Note that we need siglock even if ->exit_code == data and/or this
+	 * status was not reported yet, the new status must not be cleared by
+	 * wait_task_stopped() after resume.
+	 *
+	 * If data == 0 we do not care if wait_task_stopped() reports the old
+	 * status and clears the code too; this can't race with the tracee, it
+	 * takes siglock after resume.
+	 */
+	need_siglock = data && !thread_group_empty(current);
+	if (need_siglock)
+		spin_lock_irq(&child->sighand->siglock);
 	child->exit_code = data;
 	wake_up_state(child, __TASK_TRACED);
+	if (need_siglock)
+		spin_unlock_irq(&child->sighand->siglock);
 
 	return 0;
 }


Patches currently in stable-queue which might be from oleg@redhat.com are

queue-3.10/ptrace-fix-race-between-ptrace_resume-and-wait_task_stopped.patch