Andi Kleen wrote:
It does seem risky.  Perhaps it is a micro-optimisation which utilises
knowledge that this thread_struct cannot be looked up via any path in this
context.

Or perhaps it is a bug.  Andi, can you please comment?

On flush_thread nobody else can mess with the thread, so yes it's a micro
optimization.

Hi Andi,

Here is what I think would be a counter example :

If, at the same time, we have, on x86_64 :

parent process executing :
sys_ptrace()
 (lock_kernel())
 (ptrace_get_task_struct(pid))
 arch_ptrace()
   ptrace_detach()
     ptrace_disable(child);
       clear_singlestep(child);
         clear_tsk_thread_flag(child, TIF_SINGLESTEP);
(which clears the TIF_SINGLESTEP flag atomically from a different process)
 (put_task_struct(child))
 (unlock_kernel())

And at the same time, in the child process :
sys_execve()
 do_execve()
   search_binary_handler()
     load_elf_binary()
       flush_old_exec()
         flush_thread()
           doing a non-atomic thread flag update

Is there any protection mechanism that would protect from this race condition
that I have missed ?

And about this specific flush_thread, I am puzzled about the t->flags ^= (_TIF_ABI_PENDING | _TIF_IA32); line. The XOR will clearly flip the _TIF_ABI_PENDING bit to 0, and very likely set _TIF_IA32 to the opposite of its current value. Why does this change need to be written atomically (can other threads play with these flags ?) ?

Don't know.

iirc it came from DaveM originally. He just likes to write things in comp^wclever ways :0) It's just a little shorter.

No, I don't immediately see anything in the flush_old_exec() code path
which tells us that nobody else can look up this thread_info (or be holding
a ref to it) in this context.

Normally the process flags atomicity should only matter with signals;
i don't think you can send a signal to a process being in exec this way.

-Andi

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to