Re: futex+io_uring: futex_q::task can maybe be dangling (but is not actually accessed, so it's fine)

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Fri, Jan 10, 2025 at 08:33:34PM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:

> @@ -548,7 +549,7 @@ void __futex_queue(struct futex_q *q, struct futex_hash_bucket *hb)
>  
>  	plist_node_init(&q->list, prio);
>  	plist_add(&q->list, &hb->chain);
> -	q->task = current;
> +	q->task = task;
>  }
>  
>  /**

The alternative is, I suppose, to move the q->task assignment out to
these two callsites instead. Thomas, any opinions?

> @@ -303,7 +304,7 @@ extern int futex_unqueue(struct futex_q *q);
>  static inline void futex_queue(struct futex_q *q, struct futex_hash_bucket *hb)
>  	__releases(&hb->lock)
>  {
> -	__futex_queue(q, hb);
> +	__futex_queue(q, hb, current);
>  	spin_unlock(&hb->lock);
>  }
>  
> diff --git a/kernel/futex/pi.c b/kernel/futex/pi.c
> index d62cca5ed8f4..635c7d5d4222 100644
> --- a/kernel/futex/pi.c
> +++ b/kernel/futex/pi.c
> @@ -982,7 +982,7 @@ int futex_lock_pi(u32 __user *uaddr, unsigned int flags, ktime_t *time, int tryl
>  	/*
>  	 * Only actually queue now that the atomic ops are done:
>  	 */
> -	__futex_queue(&q, hb);
> +	__futex_queue(&q, hb, current);
>  
>  	if (trylock) {
>  		ret = rt_mutex_futex_trylock(&q.pi_state->pi_mutex);
> 
> -- 
> Jens Axboe