Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751793AbaANTVB (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Jan 2014 14:21:01 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:15160 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751485AbaANTU6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Jan 2014 14:20:58 -0500 Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 20:21:18 +0100 From: Oleg Nesterov To: Will Drewry Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, nschichan@freebox.fr, keescook@chromium.org, james.l.morris@oracle.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, holt@sgi.com, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] sys, seccomp: add PR_SECCOMP_EXT and SECCOMP_EXT_ACT_TSYNC Message-ID: <20140114192118.GA31411@redhat.com> References: <1389645028-17157-1-git-send-email-wad@chromium.org> <1389645028-17157-2-git-send-email-wad@chromium.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1389645028-17157-2-git-send-email-wad@chromium.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 01/13, Will Drewry wrote: > > +static pid_t seccomp_sync_threads(void) > +{ > + struct task_struct *thread, *caller; > + pid_t failed = 0; > + thread = caller = current; > + > + read_lock(&tasklist_lock); > + if (thread_group_empty(caller)) > + goto done; > + while_each_thread(caller, thread) { > + task_lock(thread); perhaps we take task_lock() to serialize with another caller of seccomp_sync_threads()... If yes, then perhaps you can use ->siglock instead of tasklist_lock and do not use task_lock(). It would be even better to rely on rcu, but: > + get_seccomp_filter(caller); > + /* > + * Drop the task reference to the shared ancestor since > + * current's path will hold a reference. (This also > + * allows a put before the assignment.) > + */ > + put_seccomp_filter(thread); > + thread->seccomp.filter = caller->seccomp.filter; As I said, I do not understand this patch yet, but this looks suspicious. Why we can't race with this thread doing clone(CLONE_THREAD) ? We do not the the new thread yet, but its ->seccomp can be already copied by copy_process(), no? Oleg. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/