Re: [PATCH v4 12/12] sched,signal,ptrace: Rework TASK_TRACED, TASK_STOPPED state

[Steven Rostedt]

On Tue, 28 Jun 2022 17:42:22 -0500
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> diff --git a/kernel/ptrace.c b/kernel/ptrace.c
> index 156a99283b11..cb85bcf84640 100644
> --- a/kernel/ptrace.c
> +++ b/kernel/ptrace.c
> @@ -202,6 +202,7 @@ static bool ptrace_freeze_traced(struct task_struct *task)
>  	spin_lock_irq(&task->sighand->siglock);
>  	if (task_is_traced(task) && !looks_like_a_spurious_pid(task) &&
>  	    !__fatal_signal_pending(task)) {
> +		smp_rmb();
>  		task->jobctl |= JOBCTL_PTRACE_FROZEN;
>  		ret = true;
>  	}
> diff --git a/kernel/signal.c b/kernel/signal.c
> index edb1dc9b00dc..bcd576e9de66 100644
> --- a/kernel/signal.c
> +++ b/kernel/signal.c
> @@ -2233,6 +2233,7 @@ static int ptrace_stop(int exit_code, int why, unsigned long message,
>  		return exit_code;
>  
>  	set_special_state(TASK_TRACED);
> +	smp_wmb();
>  	current->jobctl |= JOBCTL_TRACED;
>  

Are not these both done under the sighand->siglock spinlock?

That is, the two paths should already be synchronized, and the memory
barriers will not help anything inside the locks. The locking should (and
must) handle all that.

-- Steve