Re: PROBLEM: possible proceses leak
From: William Lee Irwin III
Date: Mon Dec 08 2003 - 13:28:31 EST
On Mon, Dec 08, 2003 at 09:01:40PM +0300, Andrew Volkov wrote:
> In all kernels (up to 2.6-test11) next sequence of code
> in __down/__down_interruptible function
> (arch/i386/kernel/semaphore.c) may cause processes or threads leaking.
Something like this?
-- wli
===== arch/alpha/kernel/semaphore.c 1.5 vs edited =====
--- 1.5/arch/alpha/kernel/semaphore.c Thu Apr 3 14:49:57 2003
+++ edited/arch/alpha/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Dec 8 10:19:08 2003
@@ -62,9 +62,9 @@
current->comm, current->pid, sem);
#endif
+ add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait);
current->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
wmb();
- add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait);
/* At this point we know that sem->count is negative. In order
to avoid racing with __up, we must check for wakeup before
@@ -94,8 +94,8 @@
set_task_state(current, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
}
- remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
current->state = TASK_RUNNING;
+ remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_SEMAPHORE
printk("%s(%d): down acquired(%p)\n",
@@ -114,9 +114,9 @@
current->comm, current->pid, sem);
#endif
+ add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait);
current->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
wmb();
- add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait);
while (1) {
long tmp, tmp2, tmp3;
@@ -181,8 +181,8 @@
set_task_state(current, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
}
- remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
current->state = TASK_RUNNING;
+ remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
wake_up(&sem->wait);
#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_SEMAPHORE
===== arch/arm/kernel/semaphore.c 1.8 vs edited =====
--- 1.8/arch/arm/kernel/semaphore.c Sat Sep 20 02:38:17 2003
+++ edited/arch/arm/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Dec 8 10:19:27 2003
@@ -58,8 +58,8 @@
{
struct task_struct *tsk = current;
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
- tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
spin_lock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
sem->sleepers++;
@@ -82,8 +82,8 @@
spin_lock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
}
spin_unlock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
- remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
+ remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
wake_up(&sem->wait);
}
@@ -92,8 +92,8 @@
int retval = 0;
struct task_struct *tsk = current;
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
- tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
spin_lock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
sem->sleepers ++;
===== arch/arm26/kernel/semaphore.c 1.1 vs edited =====
--- 1.1/arch/arm26/kernel/semaphore.c Wed Jun 4 04:15:45 2003
+++ edited/arch/arm26/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Dec 8 10:19:41 2003
@@ -60,8 +60,8 @@
{
struct task_struct *tsk = current;
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
- tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
spin_lock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
sem->sleepers++;
@@ -84,8 +84,8 @@
spin_lock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
}
spin_unlock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
- remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
+ remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
wake_up(&sem->wait);
}
@@ -94,8 +94,8 @@
int retval = 0;
struct task_struct *tsk = current;
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
- tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
spin_lock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
sem->sleepers ++;
===== arch/cris/kernel/semaphore.c 1.2 vs edited =====
--- 1.2/arch/cris/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Feb 4 23:39:23 2002
+++ edited/arch/cris/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Dec 8 10:17:51 2003
@@ -68,8 +68,8 @@
#define DOWN_HEAD(task_state) \
\
\
- tsk->state = (task_state); \
add_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait); \
+ tsk->state = (task_state); \
\
/* \
* Ok, we're set up. sem->count is known to be less than zero \
@@ -91,8 +91,8 @@
#define DOWN_TAIL(task_state) \
tsk->state = (task_state); \
} \
- tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING; \
remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING; \
void __down(struct semaphore * sem)
{
===== arch/h8300/kernel/semaphore.c 1.1 vs edited =====
--- 1.1/arch/h8300/kernel/semaphore.c Sun Feb 16 16:01:58 2003
+++ edited/arch/h8300/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Dec 8 10:18:07 2003
@@ -69,8 +69,8 @@
#define DOWN_HEAD(task_state) \
\
\
- current->state = (task_state); \
add_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait); \
+ current->state = (task_state); \
\
/* \
* Ok, we're set up. sem->count is known to be less than zero \
===== arch/i386/kernel/semaphore.c 1.8 vs edited =====
--- 1.8/arch/i386/kernel/semaphore.c Thu Nov 21 09:55:02 2002
+++ edited/arch/i386/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Dec 8 10:18:43 2003
@@ -59,9 +59,9 @@
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
unsigned long flags;
- tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
spin_lock_irqsave(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
add_wait_queue_exclusive_locked(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
sem->sleepers++;
for (;;) {
@@ -84,10 +84,10 @@
spin_lock_irqsave(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
}
+ tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
remove_wait_queue_locked(&sem->wait, &wait);
wake_up_locked(&sem->wait);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
- tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
}
int __down_interruptible(struct semaphore * sem)
@@ -97,9 +97,9 @@
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
unsigned long flags;
- tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
spin_lock_irqsave(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
add_wait_queue_exclusive_locked(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
sem->sleepers++;
for (;;) {
@@ -137,11 +137,11 @@
spin_lock_irqsave(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
}
+ tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
remove_wait_queue_locked(&sem->wait, &wait);
wake_up_locked(&sem->wait);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
- tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
return retval;
}
===== arch/ia64/kernel/semaphore.c 1.4 vs edited =====
--- 1.4/arch/ia64/kernel/semaphore.c Sat Aug 31 06:16:01 2002
+++ edited/arch/ia64/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Dec 8 10:20:25 2003
@@ -51,9 +51,9 @@
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
unsigned long flags;
- tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
spin_lock_irqsave(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
add_wait_queue_exclusive_locked(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
sem->sleepers++;
for (;;) {
@@ -76,10 +76,10 @@
spin_lock_irqsave(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
}
+ tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
remove_wait_queue_locked(&sem->wait, &wait);
wake_up_locked(&sem->wait);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
- tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
}
int
@@ -90,9 +90,9 @@
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
unsigned long flags;
- tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
spin_lock_irqsave(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
add_wait_queue_exclusive_locked(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
sem->sleepers ++;
for (;;) {
@@ -130,11 +130,11 @@
spin_lock_irqsave(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
}
+ tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
remove_wait_queue_locked(&sem->wait, &wait);
wake_up_locked(&sem->wait);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
- tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
return retval;
}
===== arch/m68k/kernel/semaphore.c 1.2 vs edited =====
--- 1.2/arch/m68k/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Feb 4 23:39:24 2002
+++ edited/arch/m68k/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Dec 8 10:21:00 2003
@@ -69,8 +69,8 @@
#define DOWN_HEAD(task_state) \
\
\
- current->state = (task_state); \
add_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait); \
+ current->state = (task_state); \
\
/* \
* Ok, we're set up. sem->count is known to be less than zero \
===== arch/m68knommu/kernel/semaphore.c 1.1 vs edited =====
--- 1.1/arch/m68knommu/kernel/semaphore.c Fri Nov 1 07:19:55 2002
+++ edited/arch/m68knommu/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Dec 8 10:21:10 2003
@@ -70,8 +70,8 @@
#define DOWN_HEAD(task_state) \
\
\
- current->state = (task_state); \
add_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait); \
+ current->state = (task_state); \
\
/* \
* Ok, we're set up. sem->count is known to be less than zero \
===== arch/mips/kernel/semaphore.c 1.2 vs edited =====
--- 1.2/arch/mips/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Feb 4 23:39:24 2002
+++ edited/arch/mips/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Dec 8 10:21:19 2003
@@ -68,8 +68,8 @@
#define DOWN_HEAD(task_state) \
\
\
- tsk->state = (task_state); \
add_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait); \
+ tsk->state = (task_state); \
\
/* \
* Ok, we're set up. sem->count is known to be less than zero \
===== arch/parisc/kernel/semaphore.c 1.3 vs edited =====
--- 1.3/arch/parisc/kernel/semaphore.c Sun Jul 21 14:20:31 2002
+++ edited/arch/parisc/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Dec 8 10:21:52 2003
@@ -49,8 +49,8 @@
spin_lock_irq(&sem->sentry); \
if (wakers(sem->count) == 0 && ret == 0) \
goto lost_race; /* Someone stole our wakeup */ \
- __remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait); \
current->state = TASK_RUNNING; \
+ __remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait); \
if (!waitqueue_active(&sem->wait) && (sem->count < 0)) \
sem->count = wakers(sem->count);
===== arch/ppc/kernel/semaphore.c 1.7 vs edited =====
--- 1.7/arch/ppc/kernel/semaphore.c Sun Sep 15 21:51:59 2002
+++ edited/arch/ppc/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Dec 8 10:22:15 2003
@@ -74,8 +74,8 @@
struct task_struct *tsk = current;
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
- tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
smp_wmb();
/*
@@ -88,8 +88,8 @@
schedule();
tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
}
- remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
+ remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
/*
* If there are any more sleepers, wake one of them up so
@@ -105,8 +105,8 @@
struct task_struct *tsk = current;
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
- tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
smp_wmb();
while (__sem_update_count(sem, -1) <= 0) {
===== arch/ppc64/kernel/semaphore.c 1.3 vs edited =====
--- 1.3/arch/ppc64/kernel/semaphore.c Wed Aug 27 21:23:26 2003
+++ edited/arch/ppc64/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Dec 8 10:22:33 2003
@@ -75,8 +75,8 @@
struct task_struct *tsk = current;
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
- __set_task_state(tsk, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ __set_task_state(tsk, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
/*
* Try to get the semaphore. If the count is > 0, then we've
@@ -88,8 +88,8 @@
schedule();
set_task_state(tsk, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
}
- remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
__set_task_state(tsk, TASK_RUNNING);
+ remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
/*
* If there are any more sleepers, wake one of them up so
@@ -105,8 +105,8 @@
struct task_struct *tsk = current;
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
- __set_task_state(tsk, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ __set_task_state(tsk, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
while (__sem_update_count(sem, -1) <= 0) {
if (signal_pending(current)) {
@@ -122,8 +122,8 @@
schedule();
set_task_state(tsk, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
}
- remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
__set_task_state(tsk, TASK_RUNNING);
+ remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
wake_up(&sem->wait);
return retval;
===== arch/s390/kernel/semaphore.c 1.4 vs edited =====
--- 1.4/arch/s390/kernel/semaphore.c Wed Jun 5 10:43:26 2002
+++ edited/arch/s390/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Dec 8 10:22:46 2003
@@ -64,14 +64,14 @@
struct task_struct *tsk = current;
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
- tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
while (__sem_update_count(sem, -1) <= 0) {
schedule();
tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
}
- remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
+ remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
wake_up(&sem->wait);
}
@@ -87,8 +87,8 @@
struct task_struct *tsk = current;
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
- tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
while (__sem_update_count(sem, -1) <= 0) {
if (signal_pending(current)) {
__sem_update_count(sem, 0);
@@ -98,8 +98,8 @@
schedule();
tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
}
- remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
+ remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
wake_up(&sem->wait);
return retval;
}
===== arch/sh/kernel/semaphore.c 1.3 vs edited =====
--- 1.3/arch/sh/kernel/semaphore.c Wed Apr 10 00:09:38 2002
+++ edited/arch/sh/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Dec 8 10:22:54 2003
@@ -77,8 +77,8 @@
#define DOWN_HEAD(task_state) \
\
\
- tsk->state = (task_state); \
add_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait); \
+ tsk->state = (task_state); \
\
/* \
* Ok, we're set up. sem->count is known to be less than zero \
===== arch/sparc/kernel/semaphore.c 1.5 vs edited =====
--- 1.5/arch/sparc/kernel/semaphore.c Tue Jul 16 17:12:12 2002
+++ edited/arch/sparc/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Dec 8 10:23:11 2003
@@ -49,8 +49,8 @@
{
struct task_struct *tsk = current;
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
- tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
spin_lock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
sem->sleepers++;
@@ -73,8 +73,8 @@
spin_lock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
}
spin_unlock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
- remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
+ remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
wake_up(&sem->wait);
}
===== arch/sparc64/kernel/semaphore.c 1.7 vs edited =====
--- 1.7/arch/sparc64/kernel/semaphore.c Wed Sep 3 23:40:12 2003
+++ edited/arch/sparc64/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Dec 8 10:23:37 2003
@@ -95,15 +95,15 @@
struct task_struct *tsk = current;
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
- tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
while (__sem_update_count(sem, -1) <= 0) {
schedule();
tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
}
- remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
+ remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
wake_up(&sem->wait);
}
@@ -198,8 +198,8 @@
struct task_struct *tsk = current;
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
- tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
while (__sem_update_count(sem, -1) <= 0) {
if (signal_pending(current)) {
===== arch/v850/kernel/semaphore.c 1.2 vs edited =====
--- 1.2/arch/v850/kernel/semaphore.c Wed Dec 18 18:20:47 2002
+++ edited/arch/v850/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Dec 8 10:23:58 2003
@@ -60,8 +60,8 @@
{
struct task_struct *tsk = current;
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
- tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
spin_lock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
sem->sleepers++;
@@ -84,8 +84,8 @@
spin_lock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
}
spin_unlock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
- remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
+ remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
wake_up(&sem->wait);
}
@@ -94,8 +94,8 @@
int retval = 0;
struct task_struct *tsk = current;
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
- tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
spin_lock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
sem->sleepers ++;
===== arch/x86_64/kernel/semaphore.c 1.3 vs edited =====
--- 1.3/arch/x86_64/kernel/semaphore.c Fri Oct 11 16:52:38 2002
+++ edited/arch/x86_64/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Dec 8 10:24:24 2003
@@ -60,9 +60,9 @@
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
unsigned long flags;
- tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
spin_lock_irqsave(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
add_wait_queue_exclusive_locked(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
sem->sleepers++;
for (;;) {
@@ -85,10 +85,10 @@
spin_lock_irqsave(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
}
+ tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
remove_wait_queue_locked(&sem->wait, &wait);
wake_up_locked(&sem->wait);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
- tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
}
int __down_interruptible(struct semaphore * sem)
@@ -98,9 +98,9 @@
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
unsigned long flags;
- tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
spin_lock_irqsave(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
add_wait_queue_exclusive_locked(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
sem->sleepers++;
for (;;) {
@@ -138,11 +138,11 @@
spin_lock_irqsave(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
}
+ tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
remove_wait_queue_locked(&sem->wait, &wait);
wake_up_locked(&sem->wait);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
- tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
return retval;
}
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/