4.14.87-rt50-rc1 stable review patch.
If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <[email protected]>

[ Upstream commit 8115ac730fd5aa27134f002cf710204b5dd7cd5e ]

There is a small window between setting t->task to NULL and waking the
task up (which would set TASK_RUNNING). So the timer would fire, run and
set ->task to NULL while the other side/do_nanosleep() wouldn't enter
freezable_schedule(). After all we are peemptible here (in
do_nanosleep() and on the timer wake up path) and on KVM/virt the
virt-CPU might get preempted.
So do_nanosleep() wouldn't enter freezable_schedule() but cancel the
timer which is still running and wait for it via
hrtimer_wait_for_timer(). Then wait_event()/might_sleep() would complain
that it is invoked with state != TASK_RUNNING.
This isn't a problem since it would be reset to TASK_RUNNING later
anyway and we don't rely on the previous state.

Move the state update to TASK_RUNNING before hrtimer_cancel() so there
are no complains from might_sleep() about wrong state.

Cc: [email protected]
Reviewed-by: Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt (VMware) <[email protected]>
---
 kernel/time/hrtimer.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/kernel/time/hrtimer.c b/kernel/time/hrtimer.c
index b59e009087a9..c8d806126381 100644
--- a/kernel/time/hrtimer.c
+++ b/kernel/time/hrtimer.c
@@ -1753,12 +1753,12 @@ static int __sched do_nanosleep(struct hrtimer_sleeper 
*t, enum hrtimer_mode mod
                if (likely(t->task))
                        freezable_schedule();
 
+               __set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING);
                hrtimer_cancel(&t->timer);
                mode = HRTIMER_MODE_ABS;
 
        } while (t->task && !signal_pending(current));
 
-       __set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING);
 
        if (!t->task)
                return 0;
-- 
2.19.2


Reply via email to