Oleg Nesterov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> proc_pid_readdir:
>
> for (...; ...; task = next_tgid(tgid + 1, ns)) {
> tgid = task_pid_nr_ns(task, ns);
> ... use tgid ...
>
> The first problem is that task_pid_nr_ns() can race with RCU and read the
> freed memory.
>
> However, rcu_read_lock() can't help. next_tgid() returns a pinned task_struct,
> but the task can be released (and it's pid detached) before task_pid_nr_ns()
> reads the pid_t value. In that case task_pid_nr_ns() returns 0 thus breaking
> the whole logic.
>
> Make sure that task_pid_nr_ns() returns !0 before updating tgid. Note that
> next_tgid(tgid + 1) can find the same "struct pid" again, but we shouldn't
> go into the endless loop because pid_task(PIDTYPE_PID) must return NULL in
> this case, so next_tgid() can't return the same task.
>
> Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Oleg I think I would rather update next_tgid to return the tgid (which
removes the need to call task_pid_nr_ns). This keeps all of the task
iteration logic together in next_tgid.
Although looking at this in more detail, I'm half wondering if
proc_pid_make_inode() should take a struct pid instead of a task.
At first glance that looks like it might be a little simple and more
race free. Although it doesn't do any favors to:
> inode->i_gid = 0;
> if (task_dumpable(task)) {
> inode->i_uid = task->euid;
> inode->i_gid = task->egid;
> }
> security_task_to_inode(task, inode);
Anyway short of rewriting the world this is what updating next_tgid
looks like. Opinions?
Eric
diff --git a/fs/proc/base.c b/fs/proc/base.c
index a17c268..5d9328d 100644
--- a/fs/proc/base.c
+++ b/fs/proc/base.c
@@ -2411,7 +2411,7 @@ out:
* Find the first task with tgid >= tgid
*
*/
-static struct task_struct *next_tgid(unsigned int tgid,
+static struct task_struct *next_tgid(unsigned int *tgid,
struct pid_namespace *ns)
{
struct task_struct *task;
@@ -2420,9 +2420,9 @@ static struct task_struct *next_tgid(unsigned int tgid,
rcu_read_lock();
retry:
task = NULL;
- pid = find_ge_pid(tgid, ns);
+ pid = find_ge_pid(*tgid, ns);
if (pid) {
- tgid = pid_nr_ns(pid, ns) + 1;
+ *tgid = pid_nr_ns(pid, ns);
task = pid_task(pid, PIDTYPE_PID);
/* What we to know is if the pid we have find is the
* pid of a thread_group_leader. Testing for task
@@ -2436,8 +2436,10 @@ retry:
* found doesn't happen to be a thread group leader.
* As we don't care in the case of readdir.
*/
- if (!task || !has_group_leader_pid(task))
+ if (!task || !has_group_leader_pid(task)) {
+ *tgid += 1;
goto retry;
+ }
get_task_struct(task);
}
rcu_read_unlock();
@@ -2475,10 +2477,9 @@ int proc_pid_readdir(struct file * filp, void * dirent,
filldir_t filldir)
ns = filp->f_dentry->d_sb->s_fs_info;
tgid = filp->f_pos - TGID_OFFSET;
- for (task = next_tgid(tgid, ns);
+ for (task = next_tgid(&tgid, ns);
task;
- put_task_struct(task), task = next_tgid(tgid + 1, ns)) {
- tgid = task_pid_nr_ns(task, ns);
+ put_task_struct(task), tgid += 1, task = next_tgid(&tgid, ns)) {
filp->f_pos = tgid + TGID_OFFSET;
if (proc_pid_fill_cache(filp, dirent, filldir, task, tgid) < 0)
{
put_task_struct(task);
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
