Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1757396AbcJXLYI (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Mon, 24 Oct 2016 07:24:08 -0400
Received: from merlin.infradead.org ([205.233.59.134]:55548 "EHLO
        merlin.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1753962AbcJXLYG (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Mon, 24 Oct 2016 07:24:06 -0400
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2016 13:24:02 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: "Ni, BaoleX" <baolex.ni@intel.com>,
        "mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
        "acme@kernel.org" <acme@kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com" 
        <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
        "Liu, Chuansheng" <chuansheng.liu@intel.com>
Subject: Re: hit a KASan bug related to Perf during stress test
Message-ID: <20161024112402.GI3102@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <318B87A793BE164187D8851D6CE09D64371C8811@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com>
 <20161024095341.GF3102@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20161024111526.GA13509@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20161024111526.GA13509@redhat.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23.1 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1366
Lines: 44

On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 01:15:27PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 10/24, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > > [32738.867020]  [<ffffffff810d9975>] task_tgid_nr_ns+0x35/0xb0
> >
> > So here we did: perf_event_[pt]id(event, current);
> >
> > How can _current_ not be valid anymore?
> 
> ...
> 
> > > [32739.040207]  [<ffffffff81135a4c>] __call_rcu+0x12c/0x450
> >
> > And while we just called release_task(), that call_rcu() should still be
> > pending at this point,
> 
> Yes, current is still valid.
> 
> But nothing protects current->group_leader or parent/real_parent, they
> can point to the exited/freed task. We really need to nullify them in
> __unhash_process() to catch the problems like this, I wanted to do this
> many times...
> 
> So you simply can't know your tgid or even tid after release_task() calls
> __unhash_process(). Actually after exit_notify() unless the exiting task
> autoreaps itself.
> 
> How about the trivial fix below?
> 
> Oleg.
> 
> --- x/kernel/events/core.c
> +++ x/kernel/events/core.c
> @@ -1257,7 +1257,7 @@ static u32 perf_event_pid(struct perf_ev
>  	if (event->parent)
>  		event = event->parent;
>  
> -	return task_tgid_nr_ns(p, event->ns);
> +	return pid_alive(p) ? task_tgid_nr_ns(p, event->ns) : 0;
>  }

Hurm.. should we not push this into task_tgid_nr_ns() ? I mean, now the
user needs to be aware of this dinky detail.