"Paul E. McKenney" wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2006 at 10:13:26PM +0300, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > copy_process:
> >
> > attach_pid(p, PIDTYPE_PID, p->pid);
> > attach_pid(p, PIDTYPE_TGID, p->tgid);
> >
> > What if kill_proc_info(p->pid) happens in between?
>
> Doesn't your patch 1/2 that expanded the scope of siglock in
> copy_process() prevent this from happening?
I think, no. Please see below,
> o A new process is being created on CPU 0, and does the first
> attach_pid() in copy_process(), but has not yet done
> the second attach_pid().
>
> o Meanwhile, on CPU 1, kill_proc_info() successfully looks up the
> new process via find_task_by_pid().
>
> o Also on CPU 1, kill_proc_info() calls group_send_sig_info(),
> which checks permissions, locates the sighand structure,
> then attempts to acquire siglock.
... and takes it. Without CLONE_THREAD (more precisely, CLONE_SIGHAND)
we have different ->sighand for parent (current) and for the new child.
copy_process() holds parents's ->sighand, while group_send_sig_info()
takes child's.
Oleg.
-
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/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
