summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/kernel/locking
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorKeenan Dong <keenanat2000@gmail.com>2026-04-08 16:46:00 +0800
committerThomas Gleixner <tglx@kernel.org>2026-04-21 00:22:31 +0200
commit3bfdc63936dd4773109b7b8c280c0f3b5ae7d349 (patch)
treee3d481b4426ed9caca210f6c08763b334a52457c /kernel/locking
parentc1f49dea2b8f335813d3b348fd39117fb8efb428 (diff)
rtmutex: Use waiter::task instead of current in remove_waiter()
remove_waiter() is used by the slowlock paths, but it is also used for proxy-lock rollback in rt_mutex_start_proxy_lock() when invoked from futex_requeue(). In the latter case waiter::task is not current, but remove_waiter() operates on current for the dequeue operation. That results in several problems: 1) the rbtree dequeue happens without waiter::task::pi_lock being held 2) the waiter task's pi_blocked_on state is not cleared, which leaves a dangling pointer primed for UAF around. 3) rt_mutex_adjust_prio_chain() operates on the wrong top priority waiter task Use waiter::task instead of current in all related operations in remove_waiter() to cure those problems. [ tglx: Fixup rt_mutex_adjust_prio_chain(), add a comment and amend the changelog ] Fixes: 8161239a8bcc ("rtmutex: Simplify PI algorithm and make highest prio task get lock") Reported-by: Yuan Tan <yuantan098@gmail.com> Reported-by: Yifan Wu <yifanwucs@gmail.com> Reported-by: Juefei Pu <tomapufckgml@gmail.com> Reported-by: Xin Liu <bird@lzu.edu.cn> Signed-off-by: Keenan Dong <keenanat2000@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@kernel.org> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Diffstat (limited to 'kernel/locking')
-rw-r--r--kernel/locking/rtmutex.c13
1 files changed, 8 insertions, 5 deletions
diff --git a/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c b/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
index ccaba6148b61..4f386ea6c792 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/rtmutex.c
@@ -1544,6 +1544,8 @@ static bool rtmutex_spin_on_owner(struct rt_mutex_base *lock,
*
* Must be called with lock->wait_lock held and interrupts disabled. It must
* have just failed to try_to_take_rt_mutex().
+ *
+ * When invoked from rt_mutex_start_proxy_lock() waiter::task != current !
*/
static void __sched remove_waiter(struct rt_mutex_base *lock,
struct rt_mutex_waiter *waiter)
@@ -1551,14 +1553,15 @@ static void __sched remove_waiter(struct rt_mutex_base *lock,
{
bool is_top_waiter = (waiter == rt_mutex_top_waiter(lock));
struct task_struct *owner = rt_mutex_owner(lock);
+ struct task_struct *waiter_task = waiter->task;
struct rt_mutex_base *next_lock;
lockdep_assert_held(&lock->wait_lock);
- raw_spin_lock(&current->pi_lock);
- rt_mutex_dequeue(lock, waiter);
- current->pi_blocked_on = NULL;
- raw_spin_unlock(&current->pi_lock);
+ scoped_guard(raw_spinlock, &waiter_task->pi_lock) {
+ rt_mutex_dequeue(lock, waiter);
+ waiter_task->pi_blocked_on = NULL;
+ }
/*
* Only update priority if the waiter was the highest priority
@@ -1594,7 +1597,7 @@ static void __sched remove_waiter(struct rt_mutex_base *lock,
raw_spin_unlock_irq(&lock->wait_lock);
rt_mutex_adjust_prio_chain(owner, RT_MUTEX_MIN_CHAINWALK, lock,
- next_lock, NULL, current);
+ next_lock, NULL, waiter_task);
raw_spin_lock_irq(&lock->wait_lock);
}