From: Laura Brehm <laurajfbrehm@gmail.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Laura Brehm <laurabrehm@hey.com>,
brauner@kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] coredump: fix PIDFD_INFO_COREDUMP ioctl check
Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2025 14:02:44 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250703120244.96908-3-laurabrehm@hey.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250703120244.96908-1-laurabrehm@hey.com>
In Commit 1d8db6fd698de1f73b1a7d72aea578fdd18d9a87 ("pidfs,
coredump: add PIDFD_INFO_COREDUMP"), the following code was added:
if (mask & PIDFD_INFO_COREDUMP) {
kinfo.mask |= PIDFD_INFO_COREDUMP;
kinfo.coredump_mask = READ_ONCE(pidfs_i(inode)->__pei.coredump_mask);
}
[...]
if (!(kinfo.mask & PIDFD_INFO_COREDUMP)) {
task_lock(task);
if (task->mm)
kinfo.coredump_mask = pidfs_coredump_mask(task->mm->flags);
task_unlock(task);
}
The second bit in particular looks off to me - the condition in essence
checks whether PIDFD_INFO_COREDUMP was **not** requested, and if so
fetches the coredump_mask in kinfo, since it's checking !(kinfo.mask &
PIDFD_INFO_COREDUMP), which is unconditionally set in the earlier hunk.
I'm tempted to assume the idea in the second hunk was to calculate the
coredump mask if one was requested but fetched in the first hunk, in
which case the check should be
if ((kinfo.mask & PIDFD_INFO_COREDUMP) && !(kinfo.coredump_mask))
which might be more legibly written as
if ((mask & PIDFD_INFO_COREDUMP) && !(kinfo.coredump_mask))
This could also instead be achieved by changing the first hunk to be:
if (mask & PIDFD_INFO_COREDUMP) {
kinfo.coredump_mask = READ_ONCE(pidfs_i(inode)->__pei.coredump_mask);
if (kinfo.coredump_mask)
kinfo.mask |= PIDFD_INFO_COREDUMP;
}
and the second hunk to:
if ((mask & PIDFD_INFO_COREDUMP) && !(kinfo.mask & PIDFD_INFO_COREDUMP)) {
task_lock(task);
if (task->mm) {
kinfo.coredump_mask = pidfs_coredump_mask(task->mm->flags);
kinfo.mask |= PIDFD_INFO_COREDUMP;
}
task_unlock(task);
}
However, when looking at this, the supposition that the second hunk
means to cover cases where the coredump info was requested but the first
hunk failed to get it starts getting doubtful, so apologies if I'm
completely off-base.
This patch addresses the issue by fixing the check in the second hunk.
Signed-off-by: Laura Brehm <laurabrehm@hey.com>
Cc: brauner@kernel.org
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
---
fs/pidfs.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/pidfs.c b/fs/pidfs.c
index 69919be1c9d8..4625e097e3a0 100644
--- a/fs/pidfs.c
+++ b/fs/pidfs.c
@@ -319,7 +319,7 @@ static long pidfd_info(struct file *file, unsigned int cmd, unsigned long arg)
if (!c)
return -ESRCH;
- if (!(kinfo.mask & PIDFD_INFO_COREDUMP)) {
+ if ((kinfo.mask & PIDFD_INFO_COREDUMP) && !(kinfo.coredump_mask)) {
task_lock(task);
if (task->mm)
kinfo.coredump_mask = pidfs_coredump_mask(task->mm->flags);
--
2.39.5 (Apple Git-154)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-07-03 12:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20250703120244.96908-1-laurabrehm@hey.com>
2025-07-03 12:02 ` [PATCH 1/2] coredump: fix race condition between connect and putting pidfs dentry Laura Brehm
2025-07-04 8:51 ` Christian Brauner
2025-07-04 10:40 ` [PATCH 1/2] coredump: fix race condition between connect and Laura Brehm
2025-07-03 12:02 ` Laura Brehm [this message]
2025-07-04 8:57 ` (subset) [PATCH 2/2] coredump: fix PIDFD_INFO_COREDUMP ioctl check Christian Brauner
2025-07-04 8:57 ` Christian Brauner
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=20250703120244.96908-3-laurabrehm@hey.com \
--to=laurajfbrehm@gmail.com \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=laurabrehm@hey.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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