On 8/18/21 8:37 AM, Tony Battersby wrote: > On 8/17/21 6:05 PM, Jens Axboe wrote: >> On 8/17/21 3:39 PM, Tony Battersby wrote: >>> On 8/17/21 5:28 PM, Jens Axboe wrote: >>>> Another approach - don't allow TWA_SIGNAL task_work to get queued if >>>> PF_SIGNALED has been set on the task. This is similar to how we reject >>>> task_work_add() on process exit, and the callers must be able to handle >>>> that already. >>>> >>>> Can you test this one on top of your 5.10-stable? >>>> >>>> >>>> diff --git a/fs/coredump.c b/fs/coredump.c >>>> index 07afb5ddb1c4..ca7c1ee44ada 100644 >>>> --- a/fs/coredump.c >>>> +++ b/fs/coredump.c >>>> @@ -602,6 +602,14 @@ void do_coredump(const kernel_siginfo_t *siginfo) >>>> .mm_flags = mm->flags, >>>> }; >>>> >>>> + /* >>>> + * task_work_add() will refuse to add work after PF_SIGNALED has >>>> + * been set, ensure that we flush any pending TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL work >>>> + * if any was queued before that. >>>> + */ >>>> + if (test_thread_flag(TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL)) >>>> + tracehook_notify_signal(); >>>> + >>>> audit_core_dumps(siginfo->si_signo); >>>> >>>> binfmt = mm->binfmt; >>>> diff --git a/kernel/task_work.c b/kernel/task_work.c >>>> index 1698fbe6f0e1..1ab28904adc4 100644 >>>> --- a/kernel/task_work.c >>>> +++ b/kernel/task_work.c >>>> @@ -41,6 +41,12 @@ int task_work_add(struct task_struct *task, struct callback_head *work, >>>> head = READ_ONCE(task->task_works); >>>> if (unlikely(head == &work_exited)) >>>> return -ESRCH; >>>> + /* >>>> + * TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL notifications will interfere with >>>> + * a core dump in progress, reject them. >>>> + */ >>>> + if ((task->flags & PF_SIGNALED) && notify == TWA_SIGNAL) >>>> + return -ESRCH; >>>> work->next = head; >>>> } while (cmpxchg(&task->task_works, head, work) != head); >>>> >>>> >>> Doesn't compile. 5.10 doesn't have TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL. >> Oh right... Here's one hacked up for the 5.10 TWA_SIGNAL setup. Totally >> untested... >> >> diff --git a/fs/coredump.c b/fs/coredump.c >> index c6acfc694f65..9e899ce67589 100644 >> --- a/fs/coredump.c >> +++ b/fs/coredump.c >> @@ -603,6 +603,19 @@ void do_coredump(const kernel_siginfo_t *siginfo) >> .mm_flags = mm->flags, >> }; >> >> + /* >> + * task_work_add() will refuse to add work after PF_SIGNALED has >> + * been set, ensure that we flush any pending TWA_SIGNAL work >> + * if any was queued before that. >> + */ >> + if (signal_pending(current) && (current->jobctl & JOBCTL_TASK_WORK)) { >> + task_work_run(); >> + spin_lock_irq(¤t->sighand->siglock); >> + current->jobctl &= ~JOBCTL_TASK_WORK; >> + recalc_sigpending(); >> + spin_unlock_irq(¤t->sighand->siglock); >> + } >> + >> audit_core_dumps(siginfo->si_signo); >> >> binfmt = mm->binfmt; >> diff --git a/kernel/task_work.c b/kernel/task_work.c >> index 8d6e1217c451..93b3f262eb4a 100644 >> --- a/kernel/task_work.c >> +++ b/kernel/task_work.c >> @@ -39,6 +39,12 @@ int task_work_add(struct task_struct *task, struct callback_head *work, >> head = READ_ONCE(task->task_works); >> if (unlikely(head == &work_exited)) >> return -ESRCH; >> + /* >> + * TWA_SIGNAL notifications will interfere with >> + * a core dump in progress, reject them. >> + */ >> + if ((task->flags & PF_SIGNALED) && notify == TWA_SIGNAL) >> + return -ESRCH; >> work->next = head; >> } while (cmpxchg(&task->task_works, head, work) != head); >> >> > Tested with 5.10.59 + backport 06af8679449d + the patch above. That > fixes it for me. I tested a couple of variations to make sure. > > Thanks! > > Tested-by: Tony Battersby <tonyb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Great, thanks for testing! The 5.10 version is a bit uglier due to how TWA_SIGNAL used to work, but it's the most straight forward backport of the other version I sent. -- Jens Axboe