lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Sep]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [linux-next] BUG triggered in ptraceme
On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 04:16:50PM +0200, Jann Horn wrote:
...
> >
> > Heh, actually not :) It is due to commit
> >
> > commit 1f8266ff58840d698a1e96d2274189de1bdf7969
> > Author: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>
> > Date: Thu Sep 13 18:12:09 2018 +0200
> >
> > which introduced might_sleep. Seems it is bad idea to send bug report
> > without having a cup of coffee at the morning :)
>
> Yeah, I fixed one sleep-in-atomic bug and figured I'd throw a
> might_sleep() in there for good measure... sigh.
> I guess now I have to go through all the callers of
> begin_current_label_crit_section() to see what else looks wrong...
>

Yes, I fear so. Need to check every caller just to be sure.

> apparmor_ptrace_traceme() is wrong, as reported...
>
> apparmor_path_link() looks icky, but I'm not sure - from what I can
> tell, it's called with an i_rwsem held for writing, and that probably
> makes calling back into filesystem context from there a bad idea?
> OTOH, it's just the i_rwsem of a newly-created path, so I don't know
> whether that's actually an issue...
>
> security_path_rename() is called with two i_rwsem's held, but again,
> I'm not sure whether that's a problem.

Lets wait for fs people opinions.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-09-19 18:14    [W:0.093 / U:3.116 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site