* FAILED: patch "[PATCH] futex/requeue: Prevent NULL pointer dereference in" failed to apply to 5.10-stable tree
@ 2026-07-21 15:13 gregkh
2026-07-22 15:13 ` Thomas Gleixner
2026-07-22 16:14 ` [patch 5.10.y 0/2] rtmutex/futex: Backport of rejecting fixes Thomas Gleixner
0 siblings, 2 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: gregkh @ 2026-07-21 15:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: eilaimemedsnaimel, tglx; +Cc: stable
The patch below does not apply to the 5.10-stable tree.
If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or longterm
tree, then please email the backport, including the original git commit
id to <stable@vger.kernel.org>.
To reproduce the conflict and resubmit, you may use the following commands:
git fetch https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/ linux-5.10.y
git checkout FETCH_HEAD
git cherry-pick -x 74e144274af39935b0f410c0ee4d2b91c3730414
# <resolve conflicts, build, test, etc.>
git commit -s
git send-email --to '<stable@vger.kernel.org>' --in-reply-to '2026072141-striking-reaffirm-3311@gregkh' --subject-prefix 'PATCH 5.10.y' 'HEAD^..'
Possible dependencies:
thanks,
greg k-h
------------------ original commit in Linus's tree ------------------
From 74e144274af39935b0f410c0ee4d2b91c3730414 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Ji'an Zhou <eilaimemedsnaimel@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2026 09:12:04 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] futex/requeue: Prevent NULL pointer dereference in
remove_waiter() on self-deadlock
When FUTEX_CMP_REQUEUE_PI requeues a non-top waiter that already owns the
target PI futex, task_blocks_on_rt_mutex() returns -EDEADLK before setting
waiter->task.
The subsequent remove_waiter() in rt_mutex_start_proxy_lock() dereferences
the NULL waiter->task, causing a kernel crash.
Add a self-deadlock check for non-top waiters before calling
rt_mutex_start_proxy_lock(), analogous to the top-waiter check in
futex_lock_pi_atomic().
Fixes: 3bfdc63936dd4773109b7b8c280c0f3b5ae7d349 ("rtmutex: Use waiter::task instead of current in remove_waiter()")
Signed-off-by: Ji'an Zhou <eilaimemedsnaimel@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@kernel.org>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
diff --git a/kernel/futex/requeue.c b/kernel/futex/requeue.c
index b597cb3d17fc..1d99a84dc9ad 100644
--- a/kernel/futex/requeue.c
+++ b/kernel/futex/requeue.c
@@ -643,6 +643,12 @@ int futex_requeue(u32 __user *uaddr1, unsigned int flags1,
continue;
}
+ /* Self-deadlock: non-top waiter already owns the PI futex. */
+ if (rt_mutex_owner(&pi_state->pi_mutex) == this->task) {
+ ret = -EDEADLK;
+ break;
+ }
+
ret = rt_mutex_start_proxy_lock(&pi_state->pi_mutex,
this->rt_waiter,
this->task);
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread* Re: FAILED: patch "[PATCH] futex/requeue: Prevent NULL pointer dereference in" failed to apply to 5.10-stable tree
2026-07-21 15:13 FAILED: patch "[PATCH] futex/requeue: Prevent NULL pointer dereference in" failed to apply to 5.10-stable tree gregkh
@ 2026-07-22 15:13 ` Thomas Gleixner
2026-07-22 16:14 ` [patch 5.10.y 0/2] rtmutex/futex: Backport of rejecting fixes Thomas Gleixner
1 sibling, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2026-07-22 15:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gregkh, eilaimemedsnaimel; +Cc: stable
On Tue, Jul 21 2026 at 17:13, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
> The patch below does not apply to the 5.10-stable tree.
> If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or longterm
> tree, then please email the backport, including the original git commit
> id to <stable@vger.kernel.org>.
>
> To reproduce the conflict and resubmit, you may use the following commands:
>
> git fetch https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/ linux-5.10.y
> git checkout FETCH_HEAD
> git cherry-pick -x 74e144274af39935b0f410c0ee4d2b91c3730414
As I said before this commit should not be backported as it is buggy and
got reverted upstream:
39def6d250d3 ("futex/requeue: Revert "Prevent NULL pointer dereference in remove_waiter() on self-deadlock""")
The one which fixes the actual problem is:
40a25d59e85b ("locking/rtmutex: Skip remove_waiter() when waiter is not enqueued")
That one does not apply to 5.10/15 either as the prerequisite
3bfdc63936dd ("rtmutex: Use waiter::task instead of current in remove_waiter()")
has not been backported presumably because the Fixes tag in that commit
points to a commit which got introduced post 5.15. Though the bug it
fixes got introduced way earlier.
Let me backport these two:
3bfdc63936dd ("rtmutex: Use waiter::task instead of current in remove_waiter()")
40a25d59e85b ("locking/rtmutex: Skip remove_waiter() when waiter is not enqueued")
to 5.10.y and 5.15.y. I'll send a series later.
Thanks,
tglx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread* [patch 5.10.y 0/2] rtmutex/futex: Backport of rejecting fixes
2026-07-21 15:13 FAILED: patch "[PATCH] futex/requeue: Prevent NULL pointer dereference in" failed to apply to 5.10-stable tree gregkh
2026-07-22 15:13 ` Thomas Gleixner
@ 2026-07-22 16:14 ` Thomas Gleixner
2026-07-22 16:14 ` [patch 5.10.y 1/2] rtmutex: Use waiter::task instead of current in remove_waiter() Thomas Gleixner
2026-07-22 16:14 ` [patch 5.10.y 2/2] locking/rtmutex: Skip remove_waiter() when waiter is not enqueued Thomas Gleixner
1 sibling, 2 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2026-07-22 16:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: stable; +Cc: tglx
As promised the backports of:
3bfdc63936dd ("rtmutex: Use waiter::task instead of current in remove_waiter()")
40a25d59e85b ("locking/rtmutex: Skip remove_waiter() when waiter is not enqueued")
for 5.10.y. 5.15.y needs another tiny tweak and comes separate.
Thanks,
tglx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread* [patch 5.10.y 1/2] rtmutex: Use waiter::task instead of current in remove_waiter()
2026-07-22 16:14 ` [patch 5.10.y 0/2] rtmutex/futex: Backport of rejecting fixes Thomas Gleixner
@ 2026-07-22 16:14 ` Thomas Gleixner
2026-07-22 16:14 ` [patch 5.10.y 2/2] locking/rtmutex: Skip remove_waiter() when waiter is not enqueued Thomas Gleixner
1 sibling, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2026-07-22 16:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: stable; +Cc: tglx
From: Keenan Dong <keenanat2000@gmail.com>
commit 3bfdc63936dd4773109b7b8c280c0f3b5ae7d349 upstream.
remove_waiter() is used by the slowlock paths, but it is also used for
proxy-lock rollback in rt_mutex_start_proxy_lock() when invoked from
futex_requeue().
In the latter case waiter::task is not current, but remove_waiter()
operates on current for the dequeue operation. That results in several
problems:
1) the rbtree dequeue happens without waiter::task::pi_lock being held
2) the waiter task's pi_blocked_on state is not cleared, which leaves a
dangling pointer primed for UAF around.
3) rt_mutex_adjust_prio_chain() operates on the wrong top priority waiter
task
Use waiter::task instead of current in all related operations in
remove_waiter() to cure those problems.
[ tglx: Fixup rt_mutex_adjust_prio_chain(), add a comment and amend the
changelog ]
[ tglx: Backport for 5.10.y and 5.15.y. The commit has not been backported
yet because the Fixes tag is wrong. Fixes: points now to the real
culprit. ]
Fixes: a1fb985f2e2 ("futex: Handle early deadlock return correctly") ]
Reported-by: Yuan Tan <yuantan098@gmail.com>
Reported-by: Yifan Wu <yifanwucs@gmail.com>
Reported-by: Juefei Pu <tomapufckgml@gmail.com>
Reported-by: Xin Liu <bird@lzu.edu.cn>
Signed-off-by: Keenan Dong <keenanat2000@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@kernel.org>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
---
kernel/locking/rtmutex.c | 13 ++++++++-----
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
---
--- a/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
@@ -1059,22 +1059,25 @@ static void mark_wakeup_next_waiter(stru
/*
* Remove a waiter from a lock and give up
*
- * Must be called with lock->wait_lock held and interrupts disabled. I must
+ * Must be called with lock->wait_lock held and interrupts disabled. It must
* have just failed to try_to_take_rt_mutex().
+ *
+ * When invoked from rt_mutex_start_proxy_lock() waiter::task != current !
*/
static void remove_waiter(struct rt_mutex *lock,
struct rt_mutex_waiter *waiter)
{
bool is_top_waiter = (waiter == rt_mutex_top_waiter(lock));
struct task_struct *owner = rt_mutex_owner(lock);
+ struct task_struct *waiter_task = waiter->task;
struct rt_mutex *next_lock;
lockdep_assert_held(&lock->wait_lock);
- raw_spin_lock(¤t->pi_lock);
+ raw_spin_lock(&waiter_task->pi_lock);
rt_mutex_dequeue(lock, waiter);
- current->pi_blocked_on = NULL;
- raw_spin_unlock(¤t->pi_lock);
+ waiter_task->pi_blocked_on = NULL;
+ raw_spin_lock(&waiter_task->pi_lock);
/*
* Only update priority if the waiter was the highest priority
@@ -1110,7 +1113,7 @@ static void remove_waiter(struct rt_mute
raw_spin_unlock_irq(&lock->wait_lock);
rt_mutex_adjust_prio_chain(owner, RT_MUTEX_MIN_CHAINWALK, lock,
- next_lock, NULL, current);
+ next_lock, NULL, waiter_task);
raw_spin_lock_irq(&lock->wait_lock);
}
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread* [patch 5.10.y 2/2] locking/rtmutex: Skip remove_waiter() when waiter is not enqueued
2026-07-22 16:14 ` [patch 5.10.y 0/2] rtmutex/futex: Backport of rejecting fixes Thomas Gleixner
2026-07-22 16:14 ` [patch 5.10.y 1/2] rtmutex: Use waiter::task instead of current in remove_waiter() Thomas Gleixner
@ 2026-07-22 16:14 ` Thomas Gleixner
1 sibling, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2026-07-22 16:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: stable; +Cc: tglx
From: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
commit 40a25d59e85b3c8709ac2424d44f65610467871e upstream.
syzbot triggered the following splat in remove_waiter() via
FUTEX_CMP_REQUEUE_PI:
KASAN: null-ptr-deref in range [0x0000000000000a88-0x0000000000000a8f]
class_raw_spinlock_constructor
remove_waiter+0x159/0x1200 kernel/locking/rtmutex.c:1561
rt_mutex_start_proxy_lock+0x103/0x120
futex_requeue+0x10e4/0x20d0
__x64_sys_futex+0x34f/0x4d0
task_blocks_on_rt_mutex() does not arm the waiter upon deadlock detection,
leaving waiter->task nil, where 3bfdc63936dd ("rtmutex: Use waiter::task instead
of current in remove_waiter()") made this fatal.
Furthermore, rt_mutex_start_proxy_lock() should not be calling into remove_waiter()
upon a successfully grabbing the rtmutex. 1a1fb985f2e2 ("futex: Handle early deadlock
return correctly"), moved the remove_waiter() out of __rt_mutex_start_proxy_lock()
(where 'ret' was only ever 0 or < 0) into the wrapper. Tighten this check to
account for try_to_take_rt_mutex().
Fixes: 3bfdc63936dd ("rtmutex: Use waiter::task instead of current in remove_waiter()")
Reported-by: syzbot+78147abe6c524f183ee9@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@kernel.org>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/69f114ac.050a0220.ac8b.0003.GAE@google.com/
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260507112913.1019537-1-dave@stgolabs.net
---
kernel/locking/rtmutex.c | 5 ++++-
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
---
--- a/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
@@ -1074,6 +1074,9 @@ static void remove_waiter(struct rt_mute
lockdep_assert_held(&lock->wait_lock);
+ if (!waiter_task) /* never enqueued */
+ return;
+
raw_spin_lock(&waiter_task->pi_lock);
rt_mutex_dequeue(lock, waiter);
waiter_task->pi_blocked_on = NULL;
@@ -1803,7 +1806,7 @@ int rt_mutex_start_proxy_lock(struct rt_
raw_spin_lock_irq(&lock->wait_lock);
ret = __rt_mutex_start_proxy_lock(lock, waiter, task);
- if (unlikely(ret))
+ if (unlikely(ret < 0))
remove_waiter(lock, waiter);
raw_spin_unlock_irq(&lock->wait_lock);
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2026-07-22 16:14 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2026-07-21 15:13 FAILED: patch "[PATCH] futex/requeue: Prevent NULL pointer dereference in" failed to apply to 5.10-stable tree gregkh
2026-07-22 15:13 ` Thomas Gleixner
2026-07-22 16:14 ` [patch 5.10.y 0/2] rtmutex/futex: Backport of rejecting fixes Thomas Gleixner
2026-07-22 16:14 ` [patch 5.10.y 1/2] rtmutex: Use waiter::task instead of current in remove_waiter() Thomas Gleixner
2026-07-22 16:14 ` [patch 5.10.y 2/2] locking/rtmutex: Skip remove_waiter() when waiter is not enqueued Thomas Gleixner
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox