From: Sid Kumar <sidkumar1@gmail.com>
To: stable@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>,
Keenan Dong <keenanat2000@gmail.com>,
Yuan Tan <yuantan098@gmail.com>, Yifan Wu <yifanwucs@gmail.com>,
Juefei Pu <tomapufckgml@gmail.com>, Xin Liu <bird@lzu.edu.cn>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@kernel.org>,
Sid Kumar <sidkumar1@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH 5.15.y v2 1/2] rtmutex: Use waiter::task instead of current in remove_waiter()
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2026 10:59:48 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260709145949.3640783-1-sidkumar1@gmail.com> (raw)
From: Keenan Dong <keenanat2000@gmail.com>
remove_waiter() is used by the slowlock paths, but it is also used for
proxy-lock rollback in rt_mutex_start_proxy_lock() when invoked from
futex_requeue().
In the latter case waiter::task is not current, but remove_waiter()
operates on current for the dequeue operation. That results in several
problems:
1) the rbtree dequeue happens without waiter::task::pi_lock being held
2) the waiter task's pi_blocked_on state is not cleared, which leaves a
dangling pointer primed for UAF around.
3) rt_mutex_adjust_prio_chain() operates on the wrong top priority waiter
task
Use waiter::task instead of current in all related operations in
remove_waiter() to cure those problems.
[ tglx: Fixup rt_mutex_adjust_prio_chain(), add a comment and amend the
changelog ]
[ sidk: Replace scoped_guard() macro with raw spinlock operations for
5.15]
Fixes: 8161239a8bcc ("rtmutex: Simplify PI algorithm and make highest prio task get lock")
Reported-by: Yuan Tan <yuantan098@gmail.com>
Reported-by: Yifan Wu <yifanwucs@gmail.com>
Reported-by: Juefei Pu <tomapufckgml@gmail.com>
Reported-by: Xin Liu <bird@lzu.edu.cn>
Signed-off-by: Keenan Dong <keenanat2000@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@kernel.org>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
(cherry picked from commit 3bfdc63936dd4773109b7b8c280c0f3b5ae7d349)
Signed-off-by: Sid Kumar <sidkumar1@gmail.com>
---
v1: https://lore.kernel.org/stable/20260708150527.3212183-1-sidkumar1@gmail.com/
v1 -> v2:
add a backport of 40a25d59e85b3c which is a fix
for this commit.
kernel/locking/rtmutex.c | 11 +++++++----
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c b/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
index cf72ef77bfe7..f79c9286c7c0 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
@@ -1500,20 +1500,23 @@ static bool rtmutex_spin_on_owner(struct rt_mutex_base *lock,
*
* Must be called with lock->wait_lock held and interrupts disabled. It must
* have just failed to try_to_take_rt_mutex().
+ *
+ * When invoked from rt_mutex_start_proxy_lock() waiter::task != current !
*/
static void __sched remove_waiter(struct rt_mutex_base *lock,
struct rt_mutex_waiter *waiter)
{
bool is_top_waiter = (waiter == rt_mutex_top_waiter(lock));
struct task_struct *owner = rt_mutex_owner(lock);
+ struct task_struct *waiter_task = waiter->task;
struct rt_mutex_base *next_lock;
lockdep_assert_held(&lock->wait_lock);
- raw_spin_lock(¤t->pi_lock);
+ raw_spin_lock(&waiter_task->pi_lock);
rt_mutex_dequeue(lock, waiter);
- current->pi_blocked_on = NULL;
- raw_spin_unlock(¤t->pi_lock);
+ waiter_task->pi_blocked_on = NULL;
+ raw_spin_unlock(&waiter_task->pi_lock);
/*
* Only update priority if the waiter was the highest priority
@@ -1549,7 +1552,7 @@ static void __sched remove_waiter(struct rt_mutex_base *lock,
raw_spin_unlock_irq(&lock->wait_lock);
rt_mutex_adjust_prio_chain(owner, RT_MUTEX_MIN_CHAINWALK, lock,
- next_lock, NULL, current);
+ next_lock, NULL, waiter_task);
raw_spin_lock_irq(&lock->wait_lock);
}
--
2.39.2
next reply other threads:[~2026-07-09 14:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-09 14:59 Sid Kumar [this message]
2026-07-09 14:59 ` [PATCH 5.15.y v2 2/2] locking/rtmutex: Skip remove_waiter() when waiter is not enqueued Sid Kumar
2026-07-10 21:02 ` [PATCH 5.15.y v2 1/2] rtmutex: Use waiter::task instead of current in remove_waiter() Sasha Levin
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=20260709145949.3640783-1-sidkumar1@gmail.com \
--to=sidkumar1@gmail.com \
--cc=bird@lzu.edu.cn \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=keenanat2000@gmail.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@kernel.org \
--cc=tomapufckgml@gmail.com \
--cc=yifanwucs@gmail.com \
--cc=yuantan098@gmail.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.