mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: "Américo Wang" <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
	gregkh@suse.de, taviso@google.com, viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk,
	jdike@addtoit.com, jln@google.com, mpm@selenic.com
Subject: Re: [2.6.33-rc5] tty: possible irq lock inversion dependency in tty_fasync
Date: Sat, 06 Feb 2010 23:00:20 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <m18wb58r97.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100207064643.GA15533@hack> (=?utf-8?Q?=22Am=C3=A9rico?= Wang"'s message of "Sun\, 7 Feb 2010 14\:46\:56 +0800")

Américo Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com> writes:

> On Sat, Feb 06, 2010 at 10:31:30PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>>
>>
>>On Sun, 7 Feb 2010, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
>>> 
>>> Below problem (which was introduced between 2.6.33-rc4 and 2.6.33-rc5) is
>>> not yet fixed as of 2.6.33-rc7.
>>> "git bisect start v2.6.33-rc5 v2.6.33-rc4" reported that
>>> 703625118069f9f8960d356676662d3db5a9d116 tty: fix race in tty_fasync
>>> is first bad commit.
>>
>>Yeah. I think we need to just revert that commit.
>>
>>Or maybe we could just do the following, rather than revert it outright: 
>>just get a ref to the 'struct pid' while holding the spinlock, and then 
>>releasing it after doing the __f_setown() call.
>
> We already fixed this, a better fix:
>
> http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/1/26/338
>
> I sent a same fix with Greg's.

That fix is present. See below.  Why does lockdep still warn?
Do we have lockdep bug?

Given that there is the only place we take f_owner.lock for write I
don't see how f_owner.lock can be unsafe to be called with irqs
disabled.

commit b04da8bfdfbbd79544cab2fadfdc12e87eb01600
Author: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
Date:   Tue Jan 26 15:04:02 2010 -0800

    fnctl: f_modown should call write_lock_irqsave/restore
    
    Commit 703625118069f9f8960d356676662d3db5a9d116 exposed that f_modown()
    should call write_lock_irqsave instead of just write_lock_irq so that
    because a caller could have a spinlock held and it would not be good to
    renable interrupts.
    
    Cc: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>
    Cc: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
    Cc: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
    Cc: Tavis Ormandy <taviso@google.com>
    Cc: stable <stable@kernel.org>
    Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
    Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>

diff --git a/fs/fcntl.c b/fs/fcntl.c
index 97e01dc..5ef953e 100644
--- a/fs/fcntl.c
+++ b/fs/fcntl.c
@@ -199,7 +199,9 @@ static int setfl(int fd, struct file * filp, unsigned long arg)
 static void f_modown(struct file *filp, struct pid *pid, enum pid_type type,
                      int force)
 {
-       write_lock_irq(&filp->f_owner.lock);
+       unsigned long flags;
+
+       write_lock_irqsave(&filp->f_owner.lock, flags);
        if (force || !filp->f_owner.pid) {
                put_pid(filp->f_owner.pid);
                filp->f_owner.pid = get_pid(pid);
@@ -211,7 +213,7 @@ static void f_modown(struct file *filp, struct pid *pid, enum pid_type type,
                        filp->f_owner.euid = cred->euid;
                }
        }
-       write_unlock_irq(&filp->f_owner.lock);
+       write_unlock_irqrestore(&filp->f_owner.lock, flags);
 }
 
 int __f_setown(struct file *filp, struct pid *pid, enum pid_type type,



      parent reply	other threads:[~2010-02-07  7:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-02-07  5:52 Tetsuo Handa
2010-02-07  6:31 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-02-07  6:46   ` Linus Torvalds
2010-02-07  7:27     ` Greg KH
2010-02-07  8:12       ` [2.6.33-rc5] tty: possible irq lock inversion dependency intty_fasync Tetsuo Handa
2010-02-07  6:46   ` [2.6.33-rc5] tty: possible irq lock inversion dependency in tty_fasync Américo Wang
2010-02-07  6:59     ` Linus Torvalds
2010-02-07 16:06       ` Américo Wang
2010-02-07  7:00     ` Eric W. Biederman [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=m18wb58r97.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org \
    --to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
    --cc=gregkh@suse.de \
    --cc=jdike@addtoit.com \
    --cc=jln@google.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mpm@selenic.com \
    --cc=penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp \
    --cc=taviso@google.com \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com \
    /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

Powered by JetHome