From: Oleg Nesterov Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2014 22:27:52 +0000 (-0700) Subject: mempolicy: fix show_numa_map() vs exec() + do_set_mempolicy() race X-Git-Url: https://git.stricted.de/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=498f237178a3d3151f7ebe329af9a4734e41f6ed;p=GitHub%2Fmoto-9609%2Fandroid_kernel_motorola_exynos9610.git mempolicy: fix show_numa_map() vs exec() + do_set_mempolicy() race 9e7814404b77 "hold task->mempolicy while numa_maps scans." fixed the race with the exiting task but this is not enough. The current code assumes that get_vma_policy(task) should either see task->mempolicy == NULL or it should be equal to ->task_mempolicy saved by hold_task_mempolicy(), so we can never race with __mpol_put(). But this can only work if we can't race with do_set_mempolicy(), and thus we can't race with another do_set_mempolicy() or do_exit() after that. However, do_set_mempolicy()->down_write(mmap_sem) can not prevent this race. This task can exec, change it's ->mm, and call do_set_mempolicy() after that; in this case they take 2 different locks. Change hold_task_mempolicy() to use get_task_policy(), it never returns NULL, and change show_numa_map() to use __get_vma_policy() or fall back to proc_priv->task_mempolicy. Note: this is the minimal fix, we will cleanup this code later. I think hold_task_mempolicy() and release_task_mempolicy() should die, we can move this logic into show_numa_map(). Or we can move get_task_policy() outside of ->mmap_sem and !CONFIG_NUMA code at least. Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov Cc: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Cc: David Rientjes Cc: KOSAKI Motohiro Cc: Alexander Viro Cc: Cyrill Gorcunov Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" Cc: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Hugh Dickins Cc: Andi Kleen Cc: Naoya Horiguchi Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds --- diff --git a/fs/proc/task_mmu.c b/fs/proc/task_mmu.c index adddf697c4ea..1acec26a3758 100644 --- a/fs/proc/task_mmu.c +++ b/fs/proc/task_mmu.c @@ -87,32 +87,14 @@ unsigned long task_statm(struct mm_struct *mm, #ifdef CONFIG_NUMA /* - * These functions are for numa_maps but called in generic **maps seq_file - * ->start(), ->stop() ops. - * - * numa_maps scans all vmas under mmap_sem and checks their mempolicy. - * Each mempolicy object is controlled by reference counting. The problem here - * is how to avoid accessing dead mempolicy object. - * - * Because we're holding mmap_sem while reading seq_file, it's safe to access - * each vma's mempolicy, no vma objects will never drop refs to mempolicy. - * - * A task's mempolicy (task->mempolicy) has different behavior. task->mempolicy - * is set and replaced under mmap_sem but unrefed and cleared under task_lock(). - * So, without task_lock(), we cannot trust get_vma_policy() because we cannot - * gurantee the task never exits under us. But taking task_lock() around - * get_vma_plicy() causes lock order problem. - * - * To access task->mempolicy without lock, we hold a reference count of an - * object pointed by task->mempolicy and remember it. This will guarantee - * that task->mempolicy points to an alive object or NULL in numa_maps accesses. + * Save get_task_policy() for show_numa_map(). */ static void hold_task_mempolicy(struct proc_maps_private *priv) { struct task_struct *task = priv->task; task_lock(task); - priv->task_mempolicy = task->mempolicy; + priv->task_mempolicy = get_task_policy(task); mpol_get(priv->task_mempolicy); task_unlock(task); } @@ -1431,7 +1413,6 @@ static int show_numa_map(struct seq_file *m, void *v, int is_pid) struct vm_area_struct *vma = v; struct numa_maps *md = &numa_priv->md; struct file *file = vma->vm_file; - struct task_struct *task = proc_priv->task; struct mm_struct *mm = vma->vm_mm; struct mm_walk walk = {}; struct mempolicy *pol; @@ -1451,9 +1432,13 @@ static int show_numa_map(struct seq_file *m, void *v, int is_pid) walk.private = md; walk.mm = mm; - pol = get_vma_policy(task, vma, vma->vm_start); - mpol_to_str(buffer, sizeof(buffer), pol); - mpol_cond_put(pol); + pol = __get_vma_policy(vma, vma->vm_start); + if (pol) { + mpol_to_str(buffer, sizeof(buffer), pol); + mpol_cond_put(pol); + } else { + mpol_to_str(buffer, sizeof(buffer), proc_priv->task_mempolicy); + } seq_printf(m, "%08lx %s", vma->vm_start, buffer);