Re: [PATCH] kernel/sys: Optimize do_prlimit lock scope to reduce contention

[Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>]

On 11/28, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> The problem is that task_lock(tsk->group_leader) doesn't look right with or
> without this patch. I'll try to make a fix on weekend.
>
> If the caller is sys_prlimit64() and tsk != current, then ->group_leader is
> not stable, do_prlimit() can race with mt exec and take the wrong lock.

... and task_unlock(tsk->group_leader) is simply unsafe.

perhaps something like below, but it doesn't look nice, I'll try to think
more. And grep, may be there are more lockless users of tsk->group_leader
when tsk != current.

Oleg.

--- a/kernel/sys.c
+++ b/kernel/sys.c
@@ -1464,6 +1464,7 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE2(setdomainname, char __user *, name, int, len)
 static int do_prlimit(struct task_struct *tsk, unsigned int resource,
 		      struct rlimit *new_rlim, struct rlimit *old_rlim)
 {
+	struct task_struct *leader;
 	struct rlimit *rlim;
 	int retval = 0;
 
@@ -1481,7 +1482,14 @@ static int do_prlimit(struct task_struct *tsk, unsigned int resource,
 
 	/* Holding a refcount on tsk protects tsk->signal from disappearing. */
 	rlim = tsk->signal->rlim + resource;
-	task_lock(tsk->group_leader);
+
+	if (tsk != current)
+		read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
+	leader = READ_ONCE(tsk->group_leader);
+	task_lock(leader);
+	if (tsk != current)
+		read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
+
 	if (new_rlim) {
 		/*
 		 * Keep the capable check against init_user_ns until cgroups can
@@ -1499,7 +1507,7 @@ static int do_prlimit(struct task_struct *tsk, unsigned int resource,
 		if (new_rlim)
 			*rlim = *new_rlim;
 	}
-	task_unlock(tsk->group_leader);
+	task_unlock(leader);
 
 	/*
 	 * RLIMIT_CPU handling. Arm the posix CPU timer if the limit is not