From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Kirill Tkhai <tkhai@yandex.ru>
Cc: Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@parallels.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@parallels.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/numa: fix unsafe get_task_struct() in task_numa_assign()
Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2014 21:37:44 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141019193744.GA3097@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20141019192437.GA842@redhat.com>
On 10/19, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> On 10/19, Kirill Tkhai wrote:
> >
> > --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> > +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> > @@ -1165,7 +1165,30 @@ static void task_numa_compare(struct task_numa_env *env,
> >
> > rcu_read_lock();
> > cur = ACCESS_ONCE(dst_rq->curr);
> > - if (cur->pid == 0) /* idle */
> > + /*
> > + * No need to move the exiting task, and this ensures that ->curr
> > + * wasn't reaped and thus get_task_struct() in task_numa_assign()
> > + * is safe; note that rcu_read_lock() can't protect from the final
> > + * put_task_struct() after the last schedule().
> > + */
> > + if (cur->flags & PF_EXITING)
> > + cur = NULL;
>
> so this needs probe_kernel_read(&cur->flags).
>
> > + if (cur != ACCESS_ONCE(dst_rq->curr))
> > + cur = NULL;
>
> Yes, if this task_struct was freed in between we do not care if this memory
> was reused (except PF_EXITING can be false positive). If it was freed and
> now the same memory is ->curr again we know that delayed_put_task_struct()
> can't be called until we drop rcu lock, even if PF_EXITING is already set
> again.
>
> I won't argue, but you need to convince Peter to accept this hack ;)
>
> > > Or, perhaps, we need to change the rules to ensure that any "task_struct *"
> > > pointer is rcu-safe. Perhaps we have more similar problems... I'd like to
> > > avoid this if possible.
> >
> > RT tree has:
> >
> > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/paulg/3.10-rt-patches.git/
> > tree/patches/sched-delay-put-task.patch
>
> Yes, and this obviously implies more rcu callbacks in flight, and another
> gp before __put_task_struct(). but may be we will need to do this anyway...
Forgot to mention... Or we can make task_struct_cachep SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU,
in this case ->curr (or any other "task_struct *" ponter) can not go away
under rcu_read_lock(). task_numa_compare() still needs the PF_EXITING check,
but we do not need to recheck ->curr or probe_kernel_read().
Oleg.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-10-19 19:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-10-15 12:31 [PATCH RFC] sched: Revert delayed_put_task_struct() and fix use after free Kirill Tkhai
2014-10-15 15:06 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-15 19:40 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-15 21:46 ` Kirill Tkhai
2014-10-15 22:02 ` Kirill Tkhai
2014-10-16 7:59 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-16 8:16 ` Kirill Tkhai
2014-10-16 9:43 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-16 9:50 ` Kirill Tkhai
2014-10-16 9:51 ` Kirill Tkhai
2014-10-16 10:04 ` Kirill Tkhai
2014-10-17 21:34 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-16 7:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-16 8:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-16 22:05 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-17 21:36 ` [PATCH] sched/numa: fix unsafe get_task_struct() in task_numa_assign() Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-18 8:15 ` Kirill Tkhai
2014-10-18 8:33 ` Kirill Tkhai
2014-10-18 19:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-18 21:18 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-19 8:20 ` Kirill Tkhai
2014-10-18 20:56 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-18 23:13 ` Kirill Tkhai
2014-10-19 19:24 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-19 19:37 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2014-10-19 19:43 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-10-20 9:03 ` Kirill Tkhai
2014-10-20 9:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-20 10:36 ` Kirill Tkhai
2014-10-20 9:00 ` Kirill Tkhai
2014-10-19 21:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-10-20 8:56 ` Kirill Tkhai
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=20141019193744.GA3097@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=ktkhai@parallels.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tkhai@yandex.ru \
--cc=vdavydov@parallels.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.