From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Daehyeon Ko <4ncienth@gmail.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/autogroup: Fix task_group UAF during thread creation
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2026 12:45:57 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20261103114557.GJ1813469@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <705081716ac8615650a0cc4b668689ba@kernel.org>
On Mon, Nov 02, 2026 at 09:21:14AM -1000, Tejun Heo wrote:
> I see your point. Moving the autogroup handling into the cpu controller
> keeps it better contained though. sched_cgroup_fork() places the new task by
> its cgroup only, and the cpu controller applies the autogroup once the task
> is on the thread list. This isn't a hill I'm going to die on, but it looks
> like the better direction to me. Can you please take a look at the patch
> below?
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/autogroup.h b/kernel/sched/autogroup.h
> --- a/kernel/sched/autogroup.h
> +++ b/kernel/sched/autogroup.h
> @@ -27,12 +27,12 @@ static inline bool task_group_is_autogroup(struct task_group *tg)
> return !!tg->autogroup;
> }
>
> +extern unsigned int sysctl_sched_autogroup_enabled;
> extern bool task_wants_autogroup(struct task_struct *p, struct task_group *tg);
>
> static inline struct task_group *
> autogroup_task_group(struct task_struct *p, struct task_group *tg)
> {
> - extern unsigned int sysctl_sched_autogroup_enabled;
> int enabled = READ_ONCE(sysctl_sched_autogroup_enabled);
>
> if (enabled && task_wants_autogroup(p, tg))
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
> --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> @@ -4958,7 +4958,6 @@ int sched_cgroup_fork(struct task_struct *p, struct kernel_clone_args *kargs)
> struct task_group *tg;
> tg = container_of(kargs->cset->subsys[cpu_cgrp_id],
> struct task_group, css);
> - tg = autogroup_task_group(p, tg);
> p->sched_task_group = tg;
> }
> #endif
> @@ -9598,6 +9597,15 @@ static void cpu_cgroup_cancel_attach(struct cgroup_taskset *tset)
> scx_cgroup_cancel_attach(tset);
> }
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_AUTOGROUP
> +static void cpu_cgroup_fork(struct task_struct *p)
> +{
> + if (READ_ONCE(p->sched_task_group) == &root_task_group &&
> + READ_ONCE(sysctl_sched_autogroup_enabled))
> + sched_move_task(p, true);
> +}
> +#endif
> +
> #ifdef CONFIG_UCLAMP_TASK_GROUP
> static void cpu_util_update_eff(struct cgroup_subsys_state *css)
> {
> @@ -10562,6 +10570,9 @@ struct cgroup_subsys cpu_cgrp_subsys = {
> .can_attach = cpu_cgroup_can_attach,
> .attach = cpu_cgroup_attach,
> .cancel_attach = cpu_cgroup_cancel_attach,
> +#ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_AUTOGROUP
> + .fork = cpu_cgroup_fork,
> +#endif
> .legacy_cftypes = cpu_legacy_files,
> .dfl_cftypes = cpu_files,
> .early_init = true,
>
Right; so by not doing the autogroup assignment in sched_cgroup_fork()
(which is before publishing the task) but moving it to
cgroup_post_fork() (which is post publishing), we solve the race where
setsid() misses the new task, since the task will update post publish.
Now, using cgroup_post_fork() seems weird (also, I'm not sure if this
calls cgroup_subsys::fork for *all* controllers, or only the enabled
ones).
But we can easily move this into sched_post_fork(); all we really need
to ensure is this happens before scx_post_fork(), right?
Something like so?
---
diff --git a/kernel/sched/autogroup.h b/kernel/sched/autogroup.h
index 06c82b2bdfb5..14cf3fde9767 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/autogroup.h
+++ b/kernel/sched/autogroup.h
@@ -19,6 +19,7 @@ struct autogroup {
int nice;
};
+extern unsigned int sysctl_sched_autogroup_enabled;
extern void autogroup_init(struct task_struct *init_task);
extern void autogroup_free(struct task_group *tg);
@@ -32,7 +33,6 @@ extern bool task_wants_autogroup(struct task_struct *p, struct task_group *tg);
static inline struct task_group *
autogroup_task_group(struct task_struct *p, struct task_group *tg)
{
- extern unsigned int sysctl_sched_autogroup_enabled;
int enabled = READ_ONCE(sysctl_sched_autogroup_enabled);
if (enabled && task_wants_autogroup(p, tg))
@@ -41,6 +41,16 @@ autogroup_task_group(struct task_struct *p, struct task_group *tg)
return tg;
}
+static inline void autogroup_post_fork(struct task_struct *p)
+{
+ /*
+ * If setsid() missed this new task; move it to the new autogroup now.
+ */
+ if (READ_ONCE(sysctl_sched_autogroup_enabled) &&
+ task_wants_autogroup(p, p->sched_task_group))
+ sched_move_task(p, true);
+}
+
extern int autogroup_path(struct task_group *tg, char *buf, int buflen);
#else /* !CONFIG_SCHED_AUTOGROUP: */
@@ -58,6 +68,8 @@ autogroup_task_group(struct task_struct *p, struct task_group *tg)
return tg;
}
+static inline void autogroup_post_fork(struct task_struct *p) { }
+
static inline int autogroup_path(struct task_group *tg, char *buf, int buflen)
{
return 0;
diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
index 04b62c16fa8c..3e05f7c959e6 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/core.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
@@ -4958,7 +4958,13 @@ int sched_cgroup_fork(struct task_struct *p, struct kernel_clone_args *kargs)
struct task_group *tg;
tg = container_of(kargs->cset->subsys[cpu_cgrp_id],
struct task_group, css);
+ /*
+ * No autogroup here because this is unsafe vs setsid()
+ * which will not see this thread yet. Fixed up in
+ * sched_post_fork().
+ *
tg = autogroup_task_group(p, tg);
+ */
p->sched_task_group = tg;
}
#endif
@@ -4983,6 +4989,7 @@ static void sched_mm_cid_fork(struct task_struct *t);
void sched_post_fork(struct task_struct *p)
{
+ autogroup_post_fork(p);
sched_mm_cid_fork(p);
uclamp_post_fork(p);
scx_post_fork(p);
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-11-03 11:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-23 1:36 Daehyeon Ko
2026-10-26 11:57 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-10-30 3:45 ` Daehyeon Ko
2026-10-30 15:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-10-31 2:28 ` Tejun Heo
2026-11-02 10:17 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-11-02 19:21 ` Tejun Heo
2026-11-03 11:45 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20261103114557.GJ1813469@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=4ncienth@gmail.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®