Oleg Nesterov writes:
> On 05/04, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>>
>> --- a/fs/exec.c
>> +++ b/fs/exec.c
>> @@ -1044,6 +1044,8 @@ static int exec_mmap(struct mm_struct *mm)
>> return 0;
>> }
>> mmdrop(active_mm);
>> +/* The tsk may have migrated before the new mm was attache
On 05/04, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> --- a/fs/exec.c
> +++ b/fs/exec.c
> @@ -1044,6 +1044,8 @@ static int exec_mmap(struct mm_struct *mm)
> return 0;
> }
> mmdrop(active_mm);
> + /* The tsk may have migrated before the new mm was attached */
> + mm_sync_memcg_fro
Oleg pointed out that there is a race at exec time between when
bprm->mm is initialized and the exec'ing task being migrated to a
different memory control group.
Ractor the code in memcontrol so exec_mmap can use the same code as as
fork to ensure that task->memcg == task->mm->memcg.
Reported-by
3 matches
Mail list logo
