+ um-should-hold-tasklist_lock-while-traversing-processes.patch added to -mm tree

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



The patch titled
     Subject: um: should hold tasklist_lock while traversing processes
has been added to the -mm tree.  Its filename is
     um-should-hold-tasklist_lock-while-traversing-processes.patch

Before you just go and hit "reply", please:
   a) Consider who else should be cc'ed
   b) Prefer to cc a suitable mailing list as well
   c) Ideally: find the original patch on the mailing list and do a
      reply-to-all to that, adding suitable additional cc's

*** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***

The -mm tree is included into linux-next and is updated
there every 3-4 working days

------------------------------------------------------
From: Anton Vorontsov <anton.vorontsov@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: um: should hold tasklist_lock while traversing processes

Traversing the tasks requires holding tasklist_lock, otherwise it is
unsafe.

p.s.  However, I'm not sure that calling os_kill_ptraced_process() in the
atomic context is correct.  It seem to work, but please take a closer
look.

Signed-off-by: Anton Vorontsov <anton.vorontsov@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Richard Weinberger <richard@xxxxxx>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---

 arch/um/kernel/reboot.c |    3 +++
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

diff -puN arch/um/kernel/reboot.c~um-should-hold-tasklist_lock-while-traversing-processes arch/um/kernel/reboot.c
--- a/arch/um/kernel/reboot.c~um-should-hold-tasklist_lock-while-traversing-processes
+++ a/arch/um/kernel/reboot.c
@@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
  */
 
 #include "linux/sched.h"
+#include "linux/spinlock.h"
 #include "linux/slab.h"
 #include "kern_util.h"
 #include "os.h"
@@ -22,6 +23,7 @@ static void kill_off_processes(void)
 		struct task_struct *p;
 		int pid;
 
+		read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
 		for_each_process(p) {
 			if (p->mm == NULL)
 				continue;
@@ -29,6 +31,7 @@ static void kill_off_processes(void)
 			pid = p->mm->context.id.u.pid;
 			os_kill_ptraced_process(pid, 1);
 		}
+		read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
 	}
 }
 
_
Subject: Subject: um: should hold tasklist_lock while traversing processes

Patches currently in -mm which might be from anton.vorontsov@xxxxxxxxxx are

cpu-introduce-clear_tasks_mm_cpumask-helper.patch
arm-use-clear_tasks_mm_cpumask.patch
powerpc-use-clear_tasks_mm_cpumask.patch
sh-use-clear_tasks_mm_cpumask.patch
blackfin-a-couple-of-task-mm-handling-fixes.patch
blackfin-fix-possible-deadlock-in-decode_address.patch
um-should-hold-tasklist_lock-while-traversing-processes.patch
um-fix-possible-race-on-task-mm.patch
um-properly-check-all-process-threads-for-a-live-mm.patch

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe mm-commits" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies FAQ]     [Kernel Archive]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux