Re: [PATCH v4 12/12] sched,signal,ptrace: Rework TASK_TRACED, TASK_STOPPED state
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 12/12] sched,signal,ptrace: Rework TASK_TRACED, TASK_STOPPED state
- From: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2022 22:39:59 -0500
- Cc: Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, rjw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx>, mingo@xxxxxxxxxx, vincent.guittot@xxxxxxxxxx, dietmar.eggemann@xxxxxxx, mgorman@xxxxxxx, bigeasy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, Will Deacon <will@xxxxxxxxxx>, tj@xxxxxxxxxx, linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Richard Weinberger <richard@xxxxxx>, Anton Ivanov <anton.ivanov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Johannes Berg <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-um@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Chris Zankel <chris@xxxxxxxxxx>, Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@xxxxxxxxx>, linux-xtensa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jann Horn <jannh@xxxxxxxxxx>, linux-ia64@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- In-reply-to: <20220628184850.05f60d1e@gandalf.local.home> (Steven Rostedt's message of "Tue, 28 Jun 2022 18:48:50 -0400")
- References: <87a6bv6dl6.fsf_-_@email.froward.int.ebiederm.org> <20220505182645.497868-12-ebiederm@xmission.com> <YrHA5UkJLornOdCz@li-4a3a4a4c-28e5-11b2-a85c-a8d192c6f089.ibm.com> <877d5ajesi.fsf@email.froward.int.ebiederm.org> <YrHgo8GKFPWwoBoJ@li-4a3a4a4c-28e5-11b2-a85c-a8d192c6f089.ibm.com> <87y1xk8zx5.fsf@email.froward.int.ebiederm.org> <YrtKReO2vIiX8VVU@tuxmaker.boeblingen.de.ibm.com> <87czess94h.fsf@email.froward.int.ebiederm.org> <20220628184850.05f60d1e@gandalf.local.home>
- User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux)
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Tue, 28 Jun 2022 17:42:22 -0500
> "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> diff --git a/kernel/ptrace.c b/kernel/ptrace.c
>> index 156a99283b11..cb85bcf84640 100644
>> --- a/kernel/ptrace.c
>> +++ b/kernel/ptrace.c
>> @@ -202,6 +202,7 @@ static bool ptrace_freeze_traced(struct task_struct *task)
>> spin_lock_irq(&task->sighand->siglock);
>> if (task_is_traced(task) && !looks_like_a_spurious_pid(task) &&
>> !__fatal_signal_pending(task)) {
>> + smp_rmb();
>> task->jobctl |= JOBCTL_PTRACE_FROZEN;
>> ret = true;
>> }
>> diff --git a/kernel/signal.c b/kernel/signal.c
>> index edb1dc9b00dc..bcd576e9de66 100644
>> --- a/kernel/signal.c
>> +++ b/kernel/signal.c
>> @@ -2233,6 +2233,7 @@ static int ptrace_stop(int exit_code, int why, unsigned long message,
>> return exit_code;
>>
>> set_special_state(TASK_TRACED);
>> + smp_wmb();
>> current->jobctl |= JOBCTL_TRACED;
>>
>
> Are not these both done under the sighand->siglock spinlock?
>
> That is, the two paths should already be synchronized, and the memory
> barriers will not help anything inside the locks. The locking should (and
> must) handle all that.
I would presume so to. However the READ_ONCE that is going astray
does not look like it is honoring that.
So perhaps there is a bug in the s390 spin_lock barriers? Perhaps there
is a subtle detail in the barriers that spin locks provide that we are
overlooking?
I just know the observed behavior is:
- reading tsk->jobctl and seeing JOBCTL_TRACED set.
- reading tsk->__state and seeing TASK_RUNNING.
So unless PREEMPT_RT is enabled on s390. It looks like there is a
barrier problem.
Alexander do you have PREEMPT_RT enabled on s390? I have been assuming
you don't but I figure I should ask and make certain as PREEMPT_RT can
cause this kind of failure.
Eric
- References:
- [PATCH v4 0/12] ptrace: cleaning up ptrace_stop
- [PATCH v4 12/12] sched,signal,ptrace: Rework TASK_TRACED, TASK_STOPPED state
- Re: [PATCH v4 12/12] sched,signal,ptrace: Rework TASK_TRACED, TASK_STOPPED state
- Re: [PATCH v4 12/12] sched,signal,ptrace: Rework TASK_TRACED, TASK_STOPPED state
- Re: [PATCH v4 12/12] sched,signal,ptrace: Rework TASK_TRACED, TASK_STOPPED state
- Re: [PATCH v4 12/12] sched,signal,ptrace: Rework TASK_TRACED, TASK_STOPPED state
- Re: [PATCH v4 12/12] sched,signal,ptrace: Rework TASK_TRACED, TASK_STOPPED state
- Re: [PATCH v4 12/12] sched,signal,ptrace: Rework TASK_TRACED, TASK_STOPPED state
- Re: [PATCH v4 12/12] sched,signal,ptrace: Rework TASK_TRACED, TASK_STOPPED state
- Prev by Date:
Re: [PATCH v4 12/12] sched,signal,ptrace: Rework TASK_TRACED, TASK_STOPPED state
- Next by Date:
Re: [PATCH v4 12/12] sched,signal,ptrace: Rework TASK_TRACED, TASK_STOPPED state
- Previous by thread:
Re: [PATCH v4 12/12] sched,signal,ptrace: Rework TASK_TRACED, TASK_STOPPED state
- Next by thread:
Re: [PATCH v4 12/12] sched,signal,ptrace: Rework TASK_TRACED, TASK_STOPPED state
- Index(es):
[Index of Archives]
[Linux Kernel]
[Sparc Linux]
[DCCP]
[Linux ARM]
[Yosemite News]
[Linux SCSI]
[Linux x86_64]
[Linux for Ham Radio]