On Thu 22-09-16 11:40:09, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-09-22 at 10:36 +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Thu 22-09-16 10:01:26, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > On Thu 22-09-16 06:15:02, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > > master.today...
> > > 
> > > Thanks for trying to reproduce this. My tiny laptop (2 cores, 2 threads
> > > per core) cannot reproduce even in 10 minutes or so. I've tried to use
> > > the same machine I was testing with 3.12 kernel (2 sockets, 8 cores per
> > > soc. and 2 threas per core) and it hit almost instantly. I have tried 
> > > mutex_lock_killable -> interruptible and it didn't help as I've
> > > expected. So the current kernel doesn't do any magic to prevent from the
> > > issue as well.
> > > 
> > > So I've stared into do_notify_parent some more and the following was
> > > just very confusing
> > > 
> > >   > > if (!tsk->ptrace && sig == SIGCHLD &&
> > >   > >     (psig->action[SIGCHLD-1].sa.sa_handler == SIG_IGN ||
> > >   > >      (psig->action[SIGCHLD-1].sa.sa_flags & SA_NOCLDWAIT))) {
> > >   > >     > > /*
> > >   > >     > >  * We are exiting and our parent doesn't care.  POSIX.1
> > >   > >     > >  * defines special semantics for setting SIGCHLD to SIG_IGN
> > >   > >     > >  * or setting the SA_NOCLDWAIT flag: we should be reaped
> > >   > >     > >  * automatically and not left for our parent's wait4 call.
> > >   > >     > >  * Rather than having the parent do it as a magic kind of
> > >   > >     > >  * signal handler, we just set this to tell do_exit that we
> > >   > >     > >  * can be cleaned up without becoming a zombie.  Note that
> > >   > >     > >  * we still call __wake_up_parent in this case, because a
> > >   > >     > >  * blocked sys_wait4 might now return -ECHILD.
> > >   > >     > >  *
> > >   > >     > >  * Whether we send SIGCHLD or not for SA_NOCLDWAIT
> > >   > >     > >  * is implementation-defined: we do (if you don't want
> > >   > >     > >  * it, just use SIG_IGN instead).
> > >   > >     > >  */
> > >   > >     > > autoreap = true;
> > >   > >     > > if (psig->action[SIGCHLD-1].sa.sa_handler == SIG_IGN)
> > >   > >     > >     > > sig = 0;
> > >   > > }
> > > 
> > > it tries to prevent from what I am seeing in a way. If the SIGCHLD is
> > > ignored then it just does autoreap and everything is fine. But this
> > > doesn't seem to be the case here. In fact we are not sending the signal
> > > because sig_task_ignored is true resp. sig_handler_ignored which can
> > > fail even for handler == SIG_DFL && sig_kernel_ignore() and SIGCHLD
> > > seems to be in SIG_KERNEL_IGNORE_MASK. So I've tried
> > 
> > Dohh, I've missed !tsk->ptrace check there. So we are not even going
> > that via that path. So the sig_handler_ignored cannot possible help.
> > I was just too lucky and didn't hit the lockup with the patch.
> > 
> > So what else might be wrong here? sig_ignored seems to be quite
> > confusing
> > 
> >     > /*
> >     >  * Tracers may want to know about even ignored signals.
> >     >  */
> >     > return !t->ptrace;
> > 
> > t is the tracer here but it shouldn't have t->ptrace because the child
> > is not stopped. So do we need something like the following? Not tested
> > yet
> > 
> > diff --git a/kernel/signal.c b/kernel/signal.c
> > index 1840c7f4e3c2..bd236ce4a29c 100644
> > --- a/kernel/signal.c
> > +++ b/kernel/signal.c
> > @@ -91,6 +91,10 @@ static int sig_ignored(struct task_struct *t, int sig, 
> > bool force)
> >  >  > if (!sig_task_ignored(t, sig, force))
> >  >  >       > return 0;
> >  
> > +>  > /* Do not ignore signals sent from child to the parent */
> > +>  > if (current->ptrace && current->parent == t)
> > +>  >       > return 0;
> > +
> >  >  > /*
> >  >  >  * Tracers may want to know about even ignored signals.
> >  >  >  */
> 
> This patch doesn't help, nor does the previous patch... but with both
> applied, all is well.  All you have to do now is figure out why :)

Ohh, I should be more explicit, this needs the mm_access part as well.
Sorry for not being clear enough. So the full change is
---
diff --git a/kernel/fork.c b/kernel/fork.c
index 5a57b9bab85c..d5b7c3aea187 100644
--- a/kernel/fork.c
+++ b/kernel/fork.c
@@ -837,7 +837,7 @@ struct mm_struct *mm_access(struct task_struct *task, 
unsigned int mode)
        struct mm_struct *mm;
        int err;
 
-       err =  mutex_lock_killable(&task->signal->cred_guard_mutex);
+       err =  mutex_lock_interruptible(&task->signal->cred_guard_mutex);
        if (err)
                return ERR_PTR(err);
 
diff --git a/kernel/signal.c b/kernel/signal.c
index 96e9bc40667f..5c8b84b76f0b 100644
--- a/kernel/signal.c
+++ b/kernel/signal.c
@@ -91,6 +91,10 @@ static int sig_ignored(struct task_struct *t, int sig, bool 
force)
        if (!sig_task_ignored(t, sig, force))
                return 0;
 
+       /* Do not ignore signals sent from child to the parent */
+       if (current->ptrace && current->parent == t)
+               return 0;
+
        /*
         * Tracers may want to know about even ignored signals.
         */
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Strace-devel mailing list
Strace-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/strace-devel

Reply via email to