From: Waiman Long <waiman.long@hp.com>
To: Stephen Smalley <sds@tycho.nsa.gov>
Cc: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>,
Eric Paris <eparis@parisplace.org>,
James Morris <james.l.morris@oracle.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
Scott J Norton <scott.norton@hp.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selinux: no recursive read_lock of policy_rwlock in security_genfs_sid()
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 19:37:18 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <53A4C5AE.9020209@hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <53A4742E.1090909@tycho.nsa.gov>
On 06/20/2014 01:49 PM, Stephen Smalley wrote:
> On 06/20/2014 01:45 PM, Waiman Long wrote:
>> With introduction of fair queued rwlock, recursive read_lock() may hang
>> the offending process if there is a write_lock() somewhere in between.
>>
>> With recursive read_lock checking enabled, the following error was
>> reported:
>>
>> =============================================
>> [ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ]
>> 3.16.0-rc1 #2 Tainted: G E
>> ---------------------------------------------
>> load_policy/708 is trying to acquire lock:
>> (policy_rwlock){.+.+..}, at: [<ffffffff8125b32a>] security_genfs_sid+0x3a/0x170
>>
>> but task is already holding lock:
>> (policy_rwlock){.+.+..}, at: [<ffffffff8125b48c>] security_fs_use+0x2c/0x110
>>
>> other info that might help us debug this:
>> Possible unsafe locking scenario:
>>
>> CPU0
>> ----
>> lock(policy_rwlock);
>> lock(policy_rwlock);
>>
>> This patch fixes the occurrence of recursive read_lock() of
>> policy_rwlock in security_genfs_sid() by adding a 5th argument to
>> indicate if the rwlock has been taken.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Waiman Long<Waiman.Long@hp.com>
> Thanks, but I'd prefer to instead create a static helper function in
> services.c that does not take the lock at all, use that function from
> security_fs_use, and leave the extern function unmodified.
On second thought, this is exactly what I want to change the patch. I
will send out a new one later today.
-Longman
prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-06-20 23:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-06-20 17:45 [PATCH] selinux: no recursive read_lock of policy_rwlock in security_genfs_sid() Waiman Long
2014-06-20 17:49 ` Stephen Smalley
2014-06-20 23:37 ` Waiman Long [this message]
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=53A4C5AE.9020209@hp.com \
--to=waiman.long@hp.com \
--cc=eparis@parisplace.org \
--cc=james.l.morris@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paul@paul-moore.com \
--cc=scott.norton@hp.com \
--cc=sds@tycho.nsa.gov \
/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