lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Dec]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [patch 1/9] sys: Fix missing rcu protection for __task_cred() access
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 12:52:51AM -0000, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> commit c69e8d9 (CRED: Use RCU to access another task's creds and to
> release a task's own creds) added non rcu_read_lock() protected access
> to task creds of the target task in set_prio_one().
> The comment above the function says:
> * - the caller must hold the RCU read lock
>
> The calling code in sys_setpriority does read_lock(&tasklist_lock) but
> not rcu_read_lock(). This works only when CONFIG_TREE_PREEMPT_RCU=n.
> With CONFIG_TREE_PREEMPT_RCU=y the rcu_callbacks can run in the tick
> interrupt when they see no read side critical section.
>
> There is another instance of __task_cred() in sys_setpriority() itself
> which is equally unprotected.
>
> Wrap the whole code section into a rcu read side critical section to
> fix this quick and dirty.
>
> Will be revisited in course of the read_lock(&tasklist_lock) -> rcu
> crusade.

OK, I will bite... Don't the corresponding updates write-hold
tasklist_lock? If so, then the fact that the code below is read-holding
tasklist_lock would prevent any of the data from changing, which would
remove the need to do the rcu_read_lock().

Or are there updates that are carried out without write-holding
tasklist_lock that I am missing?

Thanx, Paul

> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> Cc: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
> Cc: James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>
> Cc: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org
> ---
> kernel/sys.c | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> Index: linux-2.6-tip/kernel/sys.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6-tip.orig/kernel/sys.c
> +++ linux-2.6-tip/kernel/sys.c
> @@ -163,6 +163,7 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE3(setpriority, int, which,
> if (niceval > 19)
> niceval = 19;
>
> + rcu_read_lock();
> read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
> switch (which) {
> case PRIO_PROCESS:
> @@ -200,6 +201,7 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE3(setpriority, int, which,
> }
> out_unlock:
> read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
> + rcu_read_unlock();
> out:
> return error;
> }
>
>


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-12-10 03:45    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans