lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Dec]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] introduce put_pid_rcu() to fix unsafe put_pid(vc->vt_pid)
On 12/03, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> On Sat, 2 Dec 2006 02:48:26 +0300
> Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru> wrote:
>
> > drivers/char/vt_ioctl.c changes vc->vt_pid doing
> >
> > put_pid(xchg(&vc->vt_pid, ...));
> >
> > This is unsafe, put_pid() can actually free the memory while vc->vt_pid is
> > still used by kill_pid(vc->vt_pid).
> >
> > Add a new helper, put_pid_rcu(), which frees "struct pid" via rcu callback
> > and convert vt_ioctl.c to use it.
> >
>
>
> I'm a bit reluctant to go adding more tricky infrastructure (especially
> 100% undocumented infrastructure) on behalf of a single usage site in a
> place as creepy as the VT ioctl code.
> If we envisage future users of this infrastructure (and if it gets
> documented) then OK.

It is a shame we can't use "struct pid*" lockless, note that "struct pid"
itself is rcu-protected. I hope we can find another usage for put_pid_rcu
(in fact I suggested it before, but didn't have a reason). However, I don't
see any other example immediately.

> Otherwise I'd rather just stick another bandaid into
> the vt code. Can we add some locking there,

Yes, this is possible, and probably we should do just this.

> or change it to use a
> task_struct* or something?

I don't think this is good. It was converted from task_struct* to pid*.

Eric, what do you think?

Oleg.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-12-03 22:33    [W:0.738 / U:0.352 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site