From: Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com>
To: torvalds@linux-foundation.org
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org, audit@vger.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, selinux@vger.kernel.org,
bpf@vger.kernel.org, Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com>,
Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
Eric Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Subject: [PATCH 1/6] fs/exec: Drop task_lock() inside __get_task_comm()
Date: Sun, 2 Jun 2024 10:37:49 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240602023754.25443-2-laoar.shao@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240602023754.25443-1-laoar.shao@gmail.com>
Quoted from Linus [0]:
Since user space can randomly change their names anyway, using locking
was always wrong for readers (for writers it probably does make sense
to have some lock - although practically speaking nobody cares there
either, but at least for a writer some kind of race could have
long-term mixed results
Suggested-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAHk-=wivfrF0_zvf+oj6==Sh=-npJooP8chLPEfaFV0oNYTTBA@mail.gmail.com [0]
Signed-off-by: Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com>
Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: Eric Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
---
fs/exec.c | 7 +++++--
include/linux/sched.h | 2 +-
2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/exec.c b/fs/exec.c
index b3c40fbb325f..b43992d35a8a 100644
--- a/fs/exec.c
+++ b/fs/exec.c
@@ -1227,12 +1227,15 @@ static int unshare_sighand(struct task_struct *me)
return 0;
}
+/*
+ * User space can randomly change their names anyway, so locking for readers
+ * doesn't make sense. For writers, locking is probably necessary, as a race
+ * condition could lead to long-term mixed results.
+ */
char *__get_task_comm(char *buf, size_t buf_size, struct task_struct *tsk)
{
- task_lock(tsk);
/* Always NUL terminated and zero-padded */
strscpy_pad(buf, tsk->comm, buf_size);
- task_unlock(tsk);
return buf;
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__get_task_comm);
diff --git a/include/linux/sched.h b/include/linux/sched.h
index c75fd46506df..56a927393a38 100644
--- a/include/linux/sched.h
+++ b/include/linux/sched.h
@@ -1083,7 +1083,7 @@ struct task_struct {
*
* - normally initialized setup_new_exec()
* - access it with [gs]et_task_comm()
- * - lock it with task_lock()
+ * - lock it with task_lock() for writing
*/
char comm[TASK_COMM_LEN];
--
2.39.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-06-02 2:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-06-02 2:37 [PATCH 0/6] kernel: Avoid memcpy of task comm Yafang Shao
2024-06-02 2:37 ` Yafang Shao [this message]
2024-06-02 3:51 ` [PATCH 1/6] fs/exec: Drop task_lock() inside __get_task_comm() Eric W. Biederman
2024-06-02 6:56 ` Yafang Shao
2024-06-02 16:35 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2024-06-02 17:52 ` Eric W. Biederman
2024-06-02 18:23 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2024-06-03 11:35 ` Yafang Shao
2024-06-10 12:34 ` Eric W. Biederman
2024-06-10 23:01 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2024-06-02 20:11 ` Linus Torvalds
2024-06-02 17:56 ` Eric W. Biederman
2024-06-04 13:02 ` Matus Jokay
2024-06-04 20:01 ` Matus Jokay
2024-06-05 2:48 ` Yafang Shao
2024-06-02 2:37 ` [PATCH 2/6] tracing: Replace memcpy() with __get_task_comm() Yafang Shao
2024-06-03 21:20 ` Steven Rostedt
2024-06-03 21:42 ` Linus Torvalds
2024-06-03 22:19 ` Steven Rostedt
2024-06-03 22:23 ` Linus Torvalds
2024-06-03 22:37 ` Steven Rostedt
2024-06-03 22:38 ` Linus Torvalds
2024-06-03 22:40 ` Steven Rostedt
2024-06-04 2:35 ` Yafang Shao
2024-06-02 2:37 ` [PATCH 3/6] auditsc: " Yafang Shao
2024-06-03 21:03 ` Paul Moore
2024-06-02 2:37 ` [PATCH 4/6] security: " Yafang Shao
2024-06-03 22:06 ` Paul Moore
2024-06-02 2:37 ` [PATCH 5/6] bpftool: Make task comm always be NUL-terminated Yafang Shao
2024-06-02 21:01 ` Quentin Monnet
2024-06-02 2:46 ` [PATCH 6/6] selftests/bpf: Replace memcpy() with __get_task_comm() Yafang Shao
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=20240602023754.25443-2-laoar.shao@gmail.com \
--to=laoar.shao@gmail.com \
--cc=audit@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=selinux@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).