lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Jun]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] selinux: no recursive read_lock of policy_rwlock in security_genfs_sid()
On 06/20/2014 01:49 PM, Stephen Smalley wrote:
> On 06/20/2014 01:45 PM, Waiman Long wrote:
>> With introduction of fair queued rwlock, recursive read_lock() may hang
>> the offending process if there is a write_lock() somewhere in between.
>>
>> With recursive read_lock checking enabled, the following error was
>> reported:
>>
>> =============================================
>> [ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ]
>> 3.16.0-rc1 #2 Tainted: G E
>> ---------------------------------------------
>> load_policy/708 is trying to acquire lock:
>> (policy_rwlock){.+.+..}, at: [<ffffffff8125b32a>] security_genfs_sid+0x3a/0x170
>>
>> but task is already holding lock:
>> (policy_rwlock){.+.+..}, at: [<ffffffff8125b48c>] security_fs_use+0x2c/0x110
>>
>> other info that might help us debug this:
>> Possible unsafe locking scenario:
>>
>> CPU0
>> ----
>> lock(policy_rwlock);
>> lock(policy_rwlock);
>>
>> This patch fixes the occurrence of recursive read_lock() of
>> policy_rwlock in security_genfs_sid() by adding a 5th argument to
>> indicate if the rwlock has been taken.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Waiman Long<Waiman.Long@hp.com>
> Thanks, but I'd prefer to instead create a static helper function in
> services.c that does not take the lock at all, use that function from
> security_fs_use, and leave the extern function unmodified.

On second thought, this is exactly what I want to change the patch. I
will send out a new one later today.

-Longman


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-06-21 01:41    [W:0.049 / U:0.096 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site