My rewritten change description reads as follows:
exec: Add a exec_update_mutex to replace cred_guard_mutex
The cred_guard_mutex is problematic as it is held over possibly
indefinite waits for userspace. The possilbe indefinite waits for
userspace that I have identified are: The cred_guard_mutex is held in
PTRACE_EVENT_EXIT waiting for the tracer. The cred_guard_mutex is
held over "put_user(0, tsk->clear_child_tid)" in exit_mm(). The
cred_guard_mutex is held over "get_user(futex_offset, ...") in
exit_robust_list. The cred_guard_mutex held over copy_strings.
The functions get_user and put_user can trigger a page fault which can
potentially wait indefinitely in the case of userfaultfd or if
userspace implements part of the page fault path.
In any of those cases the userspace process that the kernel is waiting
for might userspace might make a different system call that winds up
taking the cred_guard_mutex and result in deadlock.
Holding a mutex over any of those possibly indefinite waits for
userspace does not appear necessary. Add exec_update_mutex that will
just cover updating the process during exec where the permissions and
the objects pointed to by the task struct may be out of sync.
The plan is to switch the users of cred_guard_mutex to
exec_udpate_mutex one by one. This lets us move forward while still
being careful and not introducing any regressions.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20160921152946.GA24210@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/AM6PR03MB5170B06F3A2B75EFB98D071AE4E60@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/20161102181806.GB1112@xxxxxxxxxx/
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20160923095031.GA14923@xxxxxxxxxx/
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20170213141452.GA30203@xxxxxxxxxx/
Ref: 45c1a159b85b ("Add PTRACE_O_TRACEVFORKDONE and PTRACE_O_TRACEEXIT facilities.")
Ref: 456f17cd1a28 ("[PATCH] user-vm-unlock-2.5.31-A2")
Signed-off-by: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Does that sound better?
Eric
