From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>
To: Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@sw.ru>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Jeremy Katz <jeremy.katz@windriver.com>,
taoyue <yue.tao@windriver.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sigqueue_free: fix the race with collect_signal()
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 02:05:28 +0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070823220528.GA308@tv-sign.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <46CDFDD2.4010600@us.ibm.com>
On 08/23, Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote:
>
> Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >Spotted by taoyue <yue.tao@windriver.com> and Jeremy Katz
> ><jeremy.katz@windriver.com>.
> >
> >collect_signal: sigqueue_free:
> >
> > list_del_init(&first->list);
> > if (!list_empty(&q->list)) {
> > // not taken
> > }
> > q->flags &=
> > ~SIGQUEUE_PREALLOC;
> >
> > __sigqueue_free(first); __sigqueue_free(q);
> >
> >Now, __sigqueue_free() is called twice on the same "struct sigqueue" with
> >the
> >obviously bad implications.
> >
> >--- t/kernel/signal.c~SQFREE 2007-08-22 20:06:31.000000000 +0400
> >+++ t/kernel/signal.c 2007-08-23 16:02:57.000000000 +0400
> >@@ -1297,20 +1297,19 @@ struct sigqueue *sigqueue_alloc(void)
> > void sigqueue_free(struct sigqueue *q)
> > {
> > unsigned long flags;
> >+ spinlock_t *lock = ¤t->sighand->siglock;
> >+
> > BUG_ON(!(q->flags & SIGQUEUE_PREALLOC));
> > /*
> > * If the signal is still pending remove it from the
> >- * pending queue.
> >+ * pending queue. We must hold ->siglock while testing
> >+ * q->list to serialize with collect_signal().
> > */
> >- if (unlikely(!list_empty(&q->list))) {
> >- spinlock_t *lock = ¤t->sighand->siglock;
> >- read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
> >- spin_lock_irqsave(lock, flags);
> >
> Hmm, but the existing code _does_ take the siglock here. Is that not
> sufficient ?
Yes, it does, and this is sufficient, so the patch removes tasklist_lock.
> Isn't the first list_empty() check without lock only an optimization for
> the common
> case ?
Yes, this is optimization, but I strongly believe it is wrong. Please look
at the race description above.
!list_empty(&q->list) does _not_ necessary mean that q is not used and we can
free it. It is possible that collect_signal() just removed this sigqueue from
list (list_empty(&q->list) becomes true) and going to free it.
The whole point is: we can't check list_empty() without ->siglock, this is
racy, and leads to double-free.
Oleg.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-08-23 22:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-08-23 13:45 [PATCH] sigqueue_free: fix the race with collect_signal() Oleg Nesterov
2007-08-23 21:36 ` Sukadev Bhattiprolu
2007-08-23 22:05 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2007-08-24 14:26 ` taoyue
2007-08-24 7:45 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-08-24 21:29 ` taoyue
2007-08-24 11:08 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-08-24 20:03 ` Sukadev Bhattiprolu
2007-08-24 20:23 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-08-25 17:24 ` Sukadev Bhattiprolu
2007-08-25 17:34 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-08-27 13:45 ` taoyue
2007-08-27 5:57 ` Oleg Nesterov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20070823220528.GA308@tv-sign.ru \
--to=oleg@tv-sign.ru \
--cc=adobriyan@sw.ru \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=jeremy.katz@windriver.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=roland@redhat.com \
--cc=stable@kernel.org \
--cc=sukadev@us.ibm.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=yue.tao@windriver.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.