public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Wen Yang <wenyang@linux.alibaba.com>
Cc: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>,
	Christian Brauner <christian@brauner.io>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] proc: add locking checks in proc_inode_is_dead
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2020 12:41:33 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87zh2yit5u.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201128175850.19484-1-wenyang@linux.alibaba.com> (Wen Yang's message of "Sun, 29 Nov 2020 01:58:50 +0800")

Wen Yang <wenyang@linux.alibaba.com> writes:

> The proc_inode_is_dead function might race with __unhash_process.
> This will result in a whole bunch of stale proc entries being cached.
> To prevent that, add the required locking.

I assume you are talking about during proc_task_readdir?

It is completely possible for the proc_inode_is_dead to report
the inode is still alive and then for unhash_process to
happen when afterwards.

Have you been able to trigger this race in practice?


Ouch!!!!  Oleg I just looked the introduction of proc_inode_is_dead in
d855a4b79f49 ("proc: don't (ab)use ->group_leader in proc_task_readdir()
paths") introduced a ``regression''.

Breaking the logic introduced in 7d8952440f40 ("[PATCH] procfs: Fix
listing of /proc/NOT_A_TGID/task") to keep those directory listings not
showing up.

Given that it has been 6 years and no one has cared it doesn't look like
an actual regression but it does suggest the proc_inode_is_dead can be
removed entirely as it does not achieve anything in proc_task_readdir.



As for removing the race.  I expect the thing to do is to modify
proc_pid_is_alive to verify the that the pid is still alive.
Oh but look get_task_pid verifies that thread_pid is not NULL
and unhash_process sets thread_pid to NULL.


My brain is too fuzzy right now to tell if it is possible for
get_task_pid to return a pid and then for that pid to pass through
unhash_process, while the code is still in proc_pid_make_inode.

proc_inode_is_dead is definitely not the place to look to close races.

Eric


> Signed-off-by: Wen Yang <wenyang@linux.alibaba.com>
> Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
> Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
> Cc: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>
> Cc: Christian Brauner <christian@brauner.io>
> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
> ---
>  fs/proc/base.c | 8 +++++++-
>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/proc/base.c b/fs/proc/base.c
> index 1bc9bcd..59720bc 100644
> --- a/fs/proc/base.c
> +++ b/fs/proc/base.c
> @@ -1994,7 +1994,13 @@ static int pid_revalidate(struct dentry *dentry, unsigned int flags)
>  
>  static inline bool proc_inode_is_dead(struct inode *inode)
>  {
> -	return !proc_pid(inode)->tasks[PIDTYPE_PID].first;
> +	bool has_task;
> +
> +	read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
> +	has_task = pid_has_task(proc_pid(inode), PIDTYPE_PID);
> +	read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
> +
> +	return !has_task;
>  }
>  
>  int pid_delete_dentry(const struct dentry *dentry)

  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-11-30 18:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-11-28 17:58 [PATCH] proc: add locking checks in proc_inode_is_dead Wen Yang
2020-11-28 19:01 ` Oleg Nesterov
2020-11-30 18:41 ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
2020-12-01 12:35   ` Oleg Nesterov
2020-12-01 15:06     ` Eric W. Biederman

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=87zh2yit5u.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org \
    --to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=adobriyan@gmail.com \
    --cc=christian@brauner.io \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=wenyang@linux.alibaba.com \
    /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