public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC] TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME, arch/*/*/*signal*.c and all such
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2012 19:05:35 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120429180535.GZ6871@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120429161818.GA15792@redhat.com>

On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 06:18:18PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:

> Please look at 29a2e2836ff9ea65a603c89df217f4198973a74f
> x86-32: Fix endless loop when processing signals for kernel tasks
> 
> > At least i386, arm and mips have
> > ret_from_fork going straight to "return from syscall" path, no checks for
> > return to user mode done.  And process created by kernel_thread() will
> > go there.
> 
> Looks like, the patch above fixes that.

Yes, found that shortly after posting.  No such luck for arm, though...

> But, we call do_notify_resume() first, it would be nice to avoid this
> and remove the user_mode() check in do_signal() or lift into
> do_notify_resume().

See the proposed patch.  Does exactly that - lifts all the way to caller
of do_notify_resume(), buggers off if test fits.

> Question. So far I know that on x86 do_notify_resume() && !user_mode()
> is only possible on 32bit system, and the possible callers are
> ret_from_fork or kernel_execve (if it fails).
> 
> Plus, perhaps CONFIG_VM86 makes a difference?
> 
> Could you please clarify?

VM86 doesn't make a difference; we form normal pt_regs for it in case
we have a pending signal, but after that has been done, we don't need
to care.  Look:
	* NOTIFY_RESUME handling doesn't need to be done unless we are
returning to userland.  IOW, the first step is to lift that if (!user_mode(...
into do_notify_resume().  Agreed?
	* Now, if do_notify_resume() does nothing in case !user_mode(regs),
let's lift that check to (32bit) caller.  What we have right now is
	do_notify_resume(%esp, NULL, %ecx)
	goto resume_userspace_sig;
resume_userspace_sig:
	if (!user_mode_vm(%esp))
		goto resume_kernel;
resume_userspace:
So after lifting the check we get
	if (user_mode(%esp))
		do_notify_resume(%esp, NULL, %ecx)
	goto resume_userspace_sig;
resume_userspace_sig:
	if (!user_mode_vm(%esp))
		goto resume_kernel;
resume_userspace:
but user_mode(regs) being true means that user_mode_vm(regs) is also true,
so this code is equivalent to
	if (!user_mode(%esp))
		goto resume_kernel;
	do_notify_resume(%esp, NULL, %ecx)
	goto resume_userspace;
(with stuff around resume_userspace_sig left without changes).

diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/entry_32.S b/arch/x86/kernel/entry_32.S
index 7b784f4..e858462 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/entry_32.S
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/entry_32.S
@@ -321,7 +321,6 @@ ret_from_exception:
 	preempt_stop(CLBR_ANY)
 ret_from_intr:
 	GET_THREAD_INFO(%ebp)
-resume_userspace_sig:
 #ifdef CONFIG_VM86
 	movl PT_EFLAGS(%esp), %eax	# mix EFLAGS and CS
 	movb PT_CS(%esp), %al
@@ -628,9 +627,13 @@ work_notifysig:				# deal with pending signals and
 					# vm86-space
 	TRACE_IRQS_ON
 	ENABLE_INTERRUPTS(CLBR_NONE)
+	movb PT_CS(%esp), %bl
+	andl $SEGMENT_RPL_MASK, %ebx
+	cmpl $USER_RPL, %ebx
+	jb resume_kernel
 	xorl %edx, %edx
 	call do_notify_resume
-	jmp resume_userspace_sig
+	jmp resume_userspace
 
 	ALIGN
 work_notifysig_v86:
@@ -643,9 +646,13 @@ work_notifysig_v86:
 #endif
 	TRACE_IRQS_ON
 	ENABLE_INTERRUPTS(CLBR_NONE)
+	movb PT_CS(%esp), %bl
+	andl $SEGMENT_RPL_MASK, %ebx
+	cmpl $USER_RPL, %ebx
+	jb resume_kernel
 	xorl %edx, %edx
 	call do_notify_resume
-	jmp resume_userspace_sig
+	jmp resume_userspace
 END(work_pending)
 
 	# perform syscall exit tracing
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/signal.c b/arch/x86/kernel/signal.c
index 595969f..c4aa7c5 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/signal.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/signal.c
@@ -738,16 +738,6 @@ static void do_signal(struct pt_regs *regs)
 	siginfo_t info;
 	int signr;
 
-	/*
-	 * We want the common case to go fast, which is why we may in certain
-	 * cases get here from kernel mode. Just return without doing anything
-	 * if so.
-	 * X86_32: vm86 regs switched out by assembly code before reaching
-	 * here, so testing against kernel CS suffices.
-	 */
-	if (!user_mode(regs))
-		return;
-
 	signr = get_signal_to_deliver(&info, &ka, regs, NULL);
 	if (signr > 0) {
 		/* Whee! Actually deliver the signal.  */

  reply	other threads:[~2012-04-29 18:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 91+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-04-18 13:04 [PULL REQUEST] : ima-appraisal patches Mimi Zohar
2012-04-18 15:02 ` James Morris
2012-04-18 18:07   ` Mimi Zohar
2012-04-18 18:39     ` Al Viro
2012-04-18 20:56       ` Mimi Zohar
2012-04-19 19:57       ` Mimi Zohar
2012-04-20  0:43         ` [RFC] situation with fput() locking (was Re: [PULL REQUEST] : ima-appraisal patches) Al Viro
2012-04-20  2:31           ` Linus Torvalds
2012-04-20  2:54             ` Al Viro
2012-04-20  2:58               ` Linus Torvalds
2012-04-20  8:09                 ` Al Viro
2012-04-20 15:56                   ` Linus Torvalds
2012-04-20 16:08                     ` Al Viro
2012-04-20 16:42                       ` Al Viro
2012-04-20 17:21                         ` Linus Torvalds
2012-04-20 18:07                           ` Al Viro
2012-04-23 18:01                             ` [RFC] TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME, arch/*/*/*signal*.c and all such Al Viro
2012-04-23 18:37                               ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-24  7:26                               ` Al Viro
2012-04-25  3:06                                 ` Al Viro
2012-04-25 12:37                                   ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-25 12:50                                     ` Al Viro
2012-04-25 13:03                                       ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-25 13:32                                         ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-25 13:32                                         ` Al Viro
2012-04-25 14:52                                           ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-25 15:46                                             ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-25 16:10                                               ` Al Viro
2012-04-25 17:02                                                 ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-25 17:51                                                   ` Al Viro
2012-04-26  7:15                                                     ` Martin Schwidefsky
2012-04-26  7:25                                                       ` David Miller
2012-04-26 13:52                                                       ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-26 14:31                                                         ` Martin Schwidefsky
2012-04-26 13:22                                                     ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-26 18:37                                 ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-26 23:19                                   ` Al Viro
2012-04-27 17:24                                     ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-27 17:54                                       ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-05-02 10:37                                         ` Matt Fleming
2012-05-02 14:14                                           ` Al Viro
2012-04-27 18:45                                       ` Al Viro
2012-04-27 19:14                                         ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2012-04-27 19:34                                           ` Al Viro
2012-04-29 22:51                                             ` Al Viro
2012-04-30  6:39                                               ` Greg Ungerer
2012-04-27 19:42                                         ` Al Viro
2012-04-27 20:20                                         ` Roland McGrath
2012-04-27 21:12                                           ` Al Viro
2012-04-27 21:27                                             ` Roland McGrath
2012-04-27 23:15                                               ` Al Viro
2012-04-27 23:32                                                 ` Al Viro
2012-04-29  4:12                                                   ` Al Viro
2012-04-30  8:06                                                     ` Martin Schwidefsky
2012-04-27 23:50                                                 ` Al Viro
2012-04-28 18:51                                                   ` [PATCH] arch/tile: avoid calling do_signal() after fork from a kernel thread Chris Metcalf
2012-04-28 20:55                                                     ` Al Viro
2012-04-28 21:46                                                       ` Chris Metcalf
2012-04-29  0:55                                                         ` Al Viro
2012-04-28 18:51                                                           ` [PATCH v2] arch/tile: fix up some issues in calling do_work_pending() Chris Metcalf
2012-04-29  3:49                                                           ` [PATCH] arch/tile: avoid calling do_signal() after fork from a kernel thread Chris Metcalf
2012-04-28  2:42                                                 ` [RFC] TIF_NOTIFY_RESUME, arch/*/*/*signal*.c and all such Al Viro
2012-04-28  3:32                                                   ` Al Viro
2012-04-28  3:36                                                     ` Al Viro
2012-04-29 16:33                                                     ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-29 16:18                                                   ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-29 18:05                                                     ` Al Viro [this message]
2012-05-01  4:31                                                       ` Al Viro
2012-05-01  5:06                                                         ` Mike Frysinger
2012-05-01  5:52                                                           ` Al Viro
2012-05-02 17:24                                                             ` Al Viro
2012-05-02 18:30                                                       ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-29 16:41                                         ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-29 18:09                                           ` Al Viro
2012-04-29 18:25                                             ` Oleg Nesterov
2012-04-20  3:15               ` [RFC] situation with fput() locking (was Re: [PULL REQUEST] : ima-appraisal patches) Al Viro
2012-04-20 18:54           ` Hugh Dickins
2012-04-20 19:04             ` Al Viro
2012-04-20 19:18               ` Linus Torvalds
2012-04-20 19:32                 ` Hugh Dickins
2012-04-20 19:58                 ` Al Viro
2012-04-20 21:12                   ` Linus Torvalds
2012-04-20 22:13                     ` Al Viro
2012-04-20 22:35                       ` Linus Torvalds
2012-04-27  7:35                         ` Kasatkin, Dmitry
2012-04-27 17:34                           ` Al Viro
2012-04-27 18:52                             ` Kasatkin, Dmitry
2012-04-27 19:15                               ` Kasatkin, Dmitry
2012-04-30 14:32                             ` Mimi Zohar
2012-05-03  4:23                               ` James Morris
2012-04-20 19:37               ` Al Viro

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=20120429180535.GZ6871@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
    --to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --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