From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@oracle.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>,
Andrey Ryabinin <a.ryabinin@samsung.com>
Subject: Re: finish_task_switch && prev_state (Was: sched, timers: use after free in __lock_task_sighand when exiting a process)
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 15:12:40 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140715131240.GA23014@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140714160147.GA11986@redhat.com>
Ah, I am stupid, please ignore.
Of course a TASK_DEAD task can not schedule, but we can race with RUNNING ->
DEAD transition. So we should only do put_task_struct() if "prev" was already
TASK_DEAD before we drop the rq locks.
On 07/14, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> On 07/14, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> > Yes, the task itself (or, depending ob pov, scheduler) has a reference.
> > copy_process() does
> >
> > /*
> > * One for us, one for whoever does the "release_task()" (usually
> > * parent)
> > */
> > atomic_set(&tsk->usage, 2);
> >
> > "us" actually means that put_task_struct(TASK_DEAD).
>
> Off-topic, but I do not understand the huge comment in finish_task_switch().
> Perhaps this all was true a long ago, but currently "prev could be scheduled
> on another cpu" is certainly impossible?
>
> And if it was possible we have much more problems? In particular, in this case
> we still can drop the reference twice?
>
> I'll try to recheck, but do you see anything wrong in the patch below?
>
> Oleg.
>
> --- x/kernel/sched/core.c
> +++ x/kernel/sched/core.c
> @@ -2197,22 +2197,9 @@ static void finish_task_switch(struct rq
> __releases(rq->lock)
> {
> struct mm_struct *mm = rq->prev_mm;
> - long prev_state;
>
> rq->prev_mm = NULL;
>
> - /*
> - * A task struct has one reference for the use as "current".
> - * If a task dies, then it sets TASK_DEAD in tsk->state and calls
> - * schedule one last time. The schedule call will never return, and
> - * the scheduled task must drop that reference.
> - * The test for TASK_DEAD must occur while the runqueue locks are
> - * still held, otherwise prev could be scheduled on another cpu, die
> - * there before we look at prev->state, and then the reference would
> - * be dropped twice.
> - * Manfred Spraul <manfred@colorfullife.com>
> - */
> - prev_state = prev->state;
> vtime_task_switch(prev);
> finish_arch_switch(prev);
> perf_event_task_sched_in(prev, current);
> @@ -2222,7 +2209,7 @@ static void finish_task_switch(struct rq
> fire_sched_in_preempt_notifiers(current);
> if (mm)
> mmdrop(mm);
> - if (unlikely(prev_state == TASK_DEAD)) {
> + if (unlikely(prev->state == TASK_DEAD)) {
> if (prev->sched_class->task_dead)
> prev->sched_class->task_dead(prev);
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-07-15 13:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-07-13 21:51 sched, timers: use after free in __lock_task_sighand when exiting a process Sasha Levin
2014-07-13 23:45 ` Sasha Levin
2014-07-14 9:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-07-14 9:34 ` Andrey Ryabinin
2014-07-14 9:58 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-07-14 10:25 ` Andrey Ryabinin
2014-07-14 14:49 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-07-14 15:13 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-07-14 15:31 ` Andrey Ryabinin
2014-07-14 16:01 ` finish_task_switch && prev_state (Was: sched, timers: use after free in __lock_task_sighand when exiting a process) Oleg Nesterov
2014-07-15 13:12 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2014-07-15 13:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-07-15 14:25 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-07-29 9:10 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-07-29 9:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-07-29 15:53 ` Oleg Nesterov
2014-07-15 13:28 ` sched, timers: use after free in __lock_task_sighand when exiting a process Peter Zijlstra
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=20140715131240.GA23014@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=a.ryabinin@samsung.com \
--cc=davej@redhat.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=john.stultz@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=sasha.levin@oracle.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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