From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@openwall.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Manuel Lauss <manuel.lauss@googlemail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@misterjones.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paul.mckenney@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] shm: fix a race between shm_exit() and shm_init()
Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2011 13:55:12 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110802135512.b49c9de1.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110802124530.GA2543@albatros>
On Tue, 2 Aug 2011 16:45:30 +0400
Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@openwall.com> wrote:
> On thread exit shm_exit() is called, it uses shm_ids(ns).rw_mutex.
> It is initialized in shm_init(), but it is not called yet at the moment
> of kernel threads exit. Some kernel threads are created in
> do_pre_smp_initcalls(), and shm_init() is called in do_initcalls().
>
> Static initialization of shm_ids(init_ipc_ns).rw_mutex fixes the race.
>
> It fixes a kernel oops:
>
> Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address 00000000
> ...
> [<c0320090>] (__down_write_nested+0x88/0xe0) from [<c015da08>] (exit_shm+0x28/0x48)
> [<c015da08>] (exit_shm+0x28/0x48) from [<c002e550>] (do_exit+0x59c/0x750)
> [<c002e550>] (do_exit+0x59c/0x750) from [<c003eaac>] (____call_usermodehelper+0x13c/0x154)
> [<c003eaac>] (____call_usermodehelper+0x13c/0x154) from [<c000f630>] (kernel_thread_exit+0x0/0x8)
erm, wait. There's no reason I can think of why a kernel thread needs
to call shm_exit() at all?
Is that a regular kernel thread exiting, or is it a
call_usermodehelper() worker thread? It *looks* like
____call_usermodehelper()'s kernel_execve() failed, so
____call_usermodehelper() directly called do_exit().
Something's still screwed up here - we shouldn't be trying to run
usermode helper applications before shm_init() has been run - usermode
helpers can use ipc!
Can someone who can reproduce this please work out if and why we're
calling call_usermodehelper() under do_pre_smp_initcalls()? Something
like this...
--- a/init/main.c~a
+++ a/init/main.c
@@ -722,12 +722,16 @@ static void __init do_basic_setup(void)
do_initcalls();
}
+int in_do_pre_smp_initcalls;
+
static void __init do_pre_smp_initcalls(void)
{
initcall_t *fn;
+ in_do_pre_smp_initcalls = 1;
for (fn = __initcall_start; fn < __early_initcall_end; fn++)
do_one_initcall(*fn);
+ in_do_pre_smp_initcalls = 0;
}
static void run_init_process(const char *init_filename)
--- a/kernel/kmod.c~a
+++ a/kernel/kmod.c
@@ -412,12 +412,17 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(call_usermodehelper_setfns
* asynchronously if wait is not set, and runs as a child of keventd.
* (ie. it runs with full root capabilities).
*/
+
+extern int in_do_pre_smp_initcalls;
+
int call_usermodehelper_exec(struct subprocess_info *sub_info,
enum umh_wait wait)
{
DECLARE_COMPLETION_ONSTACK(done);
int retval = 0;
+ if (in_do_pre_smp_initcalls)
+ dump_stack();
helper_lock();
if (sub_info->path[0] == '\0')
goto out;
_
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-08-02 20:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-08-01 18:01 initcall dependency problem (ns vs. threads) Vasiliy Kulikov
2011-08-01 18:20 ` Andrew Morton
2011-08-01 18:34 ` [kernel-hardening] " Vasiliy Kulikov
2011-08-01 19:03 ` Vasiliy Kulikov
2011-08-01 19:07 ` Andrew Morton
2011-08-01 19:22 ` Vasiliy Kulikov
2011-08-02 0:01 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-08-02 12:45 ` [PATCH] shm: fix a race between shm_exit() and shm_init() Vasiliy Kulikov
2011-08-02 12:51 ` Manuel Lauss
2011-08-02 13:23 ` Richard Weinberger
2011-08-02 13:29 ` Marc Zyngier
2011-08-02 20:33 ` Andrew Morton
2011-08-02 20:55 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2011-08-03 5:30 ` Manuel Lauss
2011-08-03 8:05 ` Marc Zyngier
2011-08-03 8:19 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-08-03 10:04 ` Manuel Lauss
2011-08-03 10:30 ` Marc Zyngier
2011-08-03 13:13 ` Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo
2011-08-03 13:33 ` Kay Sievers
2011-08-03 13:45 ` Richard Weinberger
2011-08-04 0:35 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-08-04 0:50 ` Andrew Morton
2011-08-04 1:01 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-08-04 1:15 ` Kay Sievers
2011-08-04 8:26 ` Marc Zyngier
2011-08-03 7:43 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-08-03 7:50 ` Manuel Lauss
2011-08-03 8:00 ` Manuel Lauss
2011-08-03 19:33 ` Andrew Morton
2011-08-03 19:52 ` [kernel-hardening] " Vasiliy Kulikov
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=20110802135512.b49c9de1.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=manuel.lauss@googlemail.com \
--cc=maz@misterjones.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=paul.mckenney@linaro.org \
--cc=richard@nod.at \
--cc=segoon@openwall.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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