mirror of
https://github.com/AuxXxilium/linux_dsm_epyc7002.git
synced 2024-11-24 02:50:53 +07:00
ptrace: __ptrace_detach: do __wake_up_parent() if we reap the tracee
The bug is old, it wasn't cause by recent changes. Test case: static void *tfunc(void *arg) { int pid = (long)arg; assert(ptrace(PTRACE_ATTACH, pid, NULL, NULL) == 0); kill(pid, SIGKILL); sleep(1); return NULL; } int main(void) { pthread_t th; long pid = fork(); if (!pid) pause(); signal(SIGCHLD, SIG_IGN); assert(pthread_create(&th, NULL, tfunc, (void*)pid) == 0); int r = waitpid(-1, NULL, __WNOTHREAD); printf("waitpid: %d %m\n", r); return 0; } Before the patch this program hangs, after this patch waitpid() correctly fails with errno == -ECHILD. The problem is, __ptrace_detach() reaps the EXIT_ZOMBIE tracee if its ->real_parent is our sub-thread and we ignore SIGCHLD. But in this case we should wake up other threads which can sleep in do_wait(). Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> Cc: Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com> Cc: Vitaly Mayatskikh <vmayatsk@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
This commit is contained in:
parent
1dd3a27326
commit
a7f0765edf
@ -2059,6 +2059,7 @@ extern int kill_pgrp(struct pid *pid, int sig, int priv);
|
||||
extern int kill_pid(struct pid *pid, int sig, int priv);
|
||||
extern int kill_proc_info(int, struct siginfo *, pid_t);
|
||||
extern int do_notify_parent(struct task_struct *, int);
|
||||
extern void __wake_up_parent(struct task_struct *p, struct task_struct *parent);
|
||||
extern void force_sig(int, struct task_struct *);
|
||||
extern void force_sig_specific(int, struct task_struct *);
|
||||
extern int send_sig(int, struct task_struct *, int);
|
||||
|
@ -1575,6 +1575,11 @@ static int ptrace_do_wait(struct wait_opts *wo, struct task_struct *tsk)
|
||||
return 0;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
void __wake_up_parent(struct task_struct *p, struct task_struct *parent)
|
||||
{
|
||||
wake_up_interruptible_sync(&parent->signal->wait_chldexit);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
static long do_wait(struct wait_opts *wo)
|
||||
{
|
||||
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, current);
|
||||
|
@ -266,9 +266,10 @@ static int ignoring_children(struct sighand_struct *sigh)
|
||||
* or self-reaping. Do notification now if it would have happened earlier.
|
||||
* If it should reap itself, return true.
|
||||
*
|
||||
* If it's our own child, there is no notification to do.
|
||||
* But if our normal children self-reap, then this child
|
||||
* was prevented by ptrace and we must reap it now.
|
||||
* If it's our own child, there is no notification to do. But if our normal
|
||||
* children self-reap, then this child was prevented by ptrace and we must
|
||||
* reap it now, in that case we must also wake up sub-threads sleeping in
|
||||
* do_wait().
|
||||
*/
|
||||
static bool __ptrace_detach(struct task_struct *tracer, struct task_struct *p)
|
||||
{
|
||||
@ -278,8 +279,10 @@ static bool __ptrace_detach(struct task_struct *tracer, struct task_struct *p)
|
||||
if (!task_detached(p) && thread_group_empty(p)) {
|
||||
if (!same_thread_group(p->real_parent, tracer))
|
||||
do_notify_parent(p, p->exit_signal);
|
||||
else if (ignoring_children(tracer->sighand))
|
||||
else if (ignoring_children(tracer->sighand)) {
|
||||
__wake_up_parent(p, tracer);
|
||||
p->exit_signal = -1;
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
if (task_detached(p)) {
|
||||
/* Mark it as in the process of being reaped. */
|
||||
|
@ -1382,15 +1382,6 @@ int send_sigqueue(struct sigqueue *q, struct task_struct *t, int group)
|
||||
return ret;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* Wake up any threads in the parent blocked in wait* syscalls.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
static inline void __wake_up_parent(struct task_struct *p,
|
||||
struct task_struct *parent)
|
||||
{
|
||||
wake_up_interruptible_sync(&parent->signal->wait_chldexit);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* Let a parent know about the death of a child.
|
||||
* For a stopped/continued status change, use do_notify_parent_cldstop instead.
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user