Re: [PATCH v14] exec: Fix dead-lock in de_thread with ptrace_attach

[Matthew Wilcox]

On Mon, Jan 15, 2024 at 08:22:19PM +0100, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> This introduces signal->exec_bprm, which is used to
> fix the case when at least one of the sibling threads
> is traced, and therefore the trace process may dead-lock
> in ptrace_attach, but de_thread will need to wait for the
> tracer to continue execution.

Not entirely sure why I've been added to the cc; this doesn't seem
like it's even remotely within my realm of expertise.

> +++ b/include/linux/cred.h
> @@ -153,6 +153,7 @@ extern const struct cred *get_task_cred(struct task_struct *);
>  extern struct cred *cred_alloc_blank(void);
>  extern struct cred *prepare_creds(void);
>  extern struct cred *prepare_exec_creds(void);
> +extern bool is_dumpability_changed(const struct cred *, const struct cred *);

Using 'extern' for function declarations is deprecated.  More
importantly, you have two arguments of the same type, and how do I know
which one is which if you don't name them?

> +++ b/kernel/cred.c
> @@ -375,6 +375,28 @@ static bool cred_cap_issubset(const struct cred *set, const struct cred *subset)
>  	return false;
>  }
>  
> +/**
> + * is_dumpability_changed - Will changing creds from old to new
> + * affect the dumpability in commit_creds?
> + *
> + * Return: false - dumpability will not be changed in commit_creds.
> + *         true  - dumpability will be changed to non-dumpable.
> + *
> + * @old: The old credentials
> + * @new: The new credentials
> + */

Does kernel-doc really parse this correctly?  Normal style would be:

/**
 * is_dumpability_changed - Will changing creds affect dumpability?
 * @old: The old credentials.
 * @new: The new credentials.
 *
 * If the @new credentials have no elevated privileges compared to the
 * @old credentials, the task may remain dumpable.  Otherwise we have
 * to mark the task as undumpable to avoid information leaks from higher
 * to lower privilege domains.
 *
 * Return: True if the task will become undumpable.
 */

> @@ -508,6 +531,14 @@ static int ptrace_traceme(void)
>  {
>  	int ret = -EPERM;
>  
> +	if (mutex_lock_interruptible(&current->signal->cred_guard_mutex))
> +		return -ERESTARTNOINTR;

Do you really want this to be interruptible by a timer signal or a
window resize event?