Re: [PATCH v2] signalfd: don't dequeue the forced fatal signals

[Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>]

It seems that this fix is going to be lost ;)

Can anyone pick it up?

Oleg.

On 04/06, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> These signals should act like SIGKILL, in that userspace must never dequeue
> them. But as Kusaram explains, io_uring-driven signalfd_read_iter() called
> from get_signal() -> task_work_run() paths can do this before get_signal()
> has a chance to dequeue such a signal and notice SA_IMMUTABLE.
> 
> Change signalfd_poll() and signalfd_dequeue() to add pending SA_IMMUTABLE
> signals to ctx->sigmask.
> 
> TODO: we should probably change force_sig_info_to_task(HANDLER_EXIT) to
> make fatal_signal_pending() true, or add a fatal_or_forced_signal_pending()
> helper. Then signalfd_dequeue() could just return -EINTR in this case.
> This also makes sense for get_signal(), which could prioritize a fatal
> signal sent by (say) force_sig_seccomp(force_coredump => true), just like
> it already prioritizes SIGKILL.
> 
> Cc: stable@kernel.org
> Reported-by: syzbot+0a4c46806941297fecb9@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
> Closes: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=0a4c46806941297fecb9
> Tested-by: syzbot+0a4c46806941297fecb9@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/69d122fd.050a0220.2dbe29.001c.GAE@google.com/
> Suggested-by: Kusaram Devineni <kusaram@devineni.in>
> Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
> Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>
> ---
>  fs/signalfd.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++------
>  1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/signalfd.c b/fs/signalfd.c
> index dff53745e352..22bc0870a824 100644
> --- a/fs/signalfd.c
> +++ b/fs/signalfd.c
> @@ -48,17 +48,30 @@ static int signalfd_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> +static void refine_sigmask(struct signalfd_ctx *ctx, sigset_t *sigmask)
> +{
> +	struct k_sigaction *k = current->sighand->action;
> +	int n;
> +
> +	*sigmask = ctx->sigmask;
> +	for (n = 1; n <= _NSIG; ++n, ++k) {
> +		if (k->sa.sa_flags & SA_IMMUTABLE)
> +			sigaddset(sigmask, n);
> +	}
> +}
> +
>  static __poll_t signalfd_poll(struct file *file, poll_table *wait)
>  {
>  	struct signalfd_ctx *ctx = file->private_data;
>  	__poll_t events = 0;
> +	sigset_t sigmask;
>  
>  	poll_wait(file, &current->sighand->signalfd_wqh, wait);
>  
>  	spin_lock_irq(&current->sighand->siglock);
> -	if (next_signal(&current->pending, &ctx->sigmask) ||
> -	    next_signal(&current->signal->shared_pending,
> -			&ctx->sigmask))
> +	refine_sigmask(ctx, &sigmask);
> +	if (next_signal(&current->pending, &sigmask) ||
> +	    next_signal(&current->signal->shared_pending, &sigmask))
>  		events |= EPOLLIN;
>  	spin_unlock_irq(&current->sighand->siglock);
>  
> @@ -155,11 +168,13 @@ static ssize_t signalfd_dequeue(struct signalfd_ctx *ctx, kernel_siginfo_t *info
>  				int nonblock)
>  {
>  	enum pid_type type;
> -	ssize_t ret;
>  	DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, current);
> +	sigset_t sigmask;
> +	ssize_t ret;
>  
>  	spin_lock_irq(&current->sighand->siglock);
> -	ret = dequeue_signal(&ctx->sigmask, info, &type);
> +	refine_sigmask(ctx, &sigmask);
> +	ret = dequeue_signal(&sigmask, info, &type);
>  	switch (ret) {
>  	case 0:
>  		if (!nonblock)
> @@ -174,7 +189,7 @@ static ssize_t signalfd_dequeue(struct signalfd_ctx *ctx, kernel_siginfo_t *info
>  	add_wait_queue(&current->sighand->signalfd_wqh, &wait);
>  	for (;;) {
>  		set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
> -		ret = dequeue_signal(&ctx->sigmask, info, &type);
> +		ret = dequeue_signal(&sigmask, info, &type);
>  		if (ret != 0)
>  			break;
>  		if (signal_pending(current)) {
> @@ -184,6 +199,7 @@ static ssize_t signalfd_dequeue(struct signalfd_ctx *ctx, kernel_siginfo_t *info
>  		spin_unlock_irq(&current->sighand->siglock);
>  		schedule();
>  		spin_lock_irq(&current->sighand->siglock);
> +		refine_sigmask(ctx, &sigmask);
>  	}
>  	spin_unlock_irq(&current->sighand->siglock);
>  
> -- 
> 2.52.0
>