On Thu, 2016-12-29 at 21:47 -0500, Dave Jones wrote: > This is a new one for me.. > > ===================================== > [ BUG: bad unlock balance detected! ] > 4.10.0-rc1-think+ #8 Not tainted > ------------------------------------- > trinity-c47/31138 is trying to release lock ( > [CONT START] &(&new->lock)->rlock > [CONT START] ) at: > [<ffffffff8136627f>] SYSC_semtimedop+0x97f/0x11d0 > but there are no more locks to release!
This? From: Manfred Spraul <manf...@colorfullife.com> Subject: [PATCH] ipc/sem.c: fix semop()/semop() locking failure Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2016 19:38:45 +0100 Based on the syzcaller test case from dvyukov: https://gist.githubusercontent.com/dvyukov/d0e5efefe4d7d6daed829f5c3ca26a40/raw/08d0a261fe3c987bed04fbf267e08ba04bd533ea/gistfile1.txt The slow (i.e.: failure to acquire) syscall exit from semtimedop() incorrectly assumed that the the same lock is acquired as it was at the initial syscall entry. This is wrong: - thread A: single semop semop(), sleeps - thread B: multi semop semop(), sleeps - thread A: woken up by signal/timeout With this sequence, the initial sem_lock() call locks the per-semaphore spinlock, the call at the syscall return locks the global spinlock. The fix is trivial: Use the return value from sem_lock. Reported-by: dvyu...@google.com Signed-off-by: Manfred Spraul <manf...@colorfullife.com> Fixes: 370b262c896e ("ipc/sem: avoid idr tree lookup for interrupted semop") Cc: d...@stgolabs.net --- ipc/sem.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) --- a/ipc/sem.c +++ b/ipc/sem.c @@ -1977,7 +1977,7 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE4(semtimedop, int, semid, } rcu_read_lock(); - sem_lock(sma, sops, nsops); + locknum = sem_lock(sma, sops, nsops); if (!ipc_valid_object(&sma->sem_perm)) goto out_unlock_free;