The current check in rethook_find_ret_addr() prevents obtaining a return
address when the target task is marked as running. However, this condition
is both insufficient for correctness and unnecessary for its intended
purpose.
The check is inherently racy: a task can begin running on another CPU
immediately after task_is_running() returns false, potentially leading to
concurrent modification of rethook data structures while the iteration is
in progress.
Rather than trying to fix this unreliable check deep in the unwinding
path, simply remove it. The iteration is already safe from crashes because
unwind_next_frame() holds RCU and rethook_node structures are RCU-freed;
even if the iteration goes off the rails and returns invalid information,
it will not crash. Callers that require consistency must provide a safe
context themselves.
Fixes: 54ecbe6f1ed5 ("rethook: Add a generic return hook")
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Tengda Wu <[email protected]>
---
v3: Improve commit message: clarify safety semantics and document that RCU
guarantees no crash.
v2:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
v1:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
kernel/trace/rethook.c | 3 ---
1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/trace/rethook.c b/kernel/trace/rethook.c
index 5a8bdf88999a..f70f11bc6c91 100644
--- a/kernel/trace/rethook.c
+++ b/kernel/trace/rethook.c
@@ -250,9 +250,6 @@ unsigned long rethook_find_ret_addr(struct task_struct
*tsk, unsigned long frame
if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!cur))
return 0;
- if (tsk != current && task_is_running(tsk))
- return 0;
-
do {
ret = __rethook_find_ret_addr(tsk, cur);
if (!ret)
--
2.34.1
