From 4943b66df18a0e8aedd006792ed73257cd2da8f8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Andrei Vagin Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2023 23:31:56 -0800 Subject: seccomp: don't use semaphore and wait_queue together The main reason is to use new wake_up helpers that will be added in the following patches. But here are a few other reasons: * if we use two different ways, we always need to call them both. This patch fixes seccomp_notify_recv where we forgot to call wake_up_poll in the error path. * If we use one primitive, we can control how many waiters are woken up for each request. Our goal is to wake up just one that will handle a request. Right now, wake_up_poll can wake up one waiter and up(&match->notif->request) can wake up one more. Signed-off-by: Andrei Vagin Acked-by: "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230308073201.3102738-2-avagin@google.com Signed-off-by: Kees Cook --- kernel/seccomp.c | 41 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----- 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) (limited to 'kernel/seccomp.c') diff --git a/kernel/seccomp.c b/kernel/seccomp.c index d3e584065c7f..1386dcedda1a 100644 --- a/kernel/seccomp.c +++ b/kernel/seccomp.c @@ -145,7 +145,7 @@ struct seccomp_kaddfd { * @notifications: A list of struct seccomp_knotif elements. */ struct notification { - struct semaphore request; + atomic_t requests; u64 next_id; struct list_head notifications; }; @@ -1116,7 +1116,7 @@ static int seccomp_do_user_notification(int this_syscall, list_add_tail(&n.list, &match->notif->notifications); INIT_LIST_HEAD(&n.addfd); - up(&match->notif->request); + atomic_inc(&match->notif->requests); wake_up_poll(&match->wqh, EPOLLIN | EPOLLRDNORM); /* @@ -1450,6 +1450,37 @@ find_notification(struct seccomp_filter *filter, u64 id) return NULL; } +static int recv_wake_function(wait_queue_entry_t *wait, unsigned int mode, int sync, + void *key) +{ + /* Avoid a wakeup if event not interesting for us. */ + if (key && !(key_to_poll(key) & (EPOLLIN | EPOLLERR))) + return 0; + return autoremove_wake_function(wait, mode, sync, key); +} + +static int recv_wait_event(struct seccomp_filter *filter) +{ + DEFINE_WAIT_FUNC(wait, recv_wake_function); + int ret; + + if (atomic_dec_if_positive(&filter->notif->requests) >= 0) + return 0; + + for (;;) { + ret = prepare_to_wait_event(&filter->wqh, &wait, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE); + + if (atomic_dec_if_positive(&filter->notif->requests) >= 0) + break; + + if (ret) + return ret; + + schedule(); + } + finish_wait(&filter->wqh, &wait); + return 0; +} static long seccomp_notify_recv(struct seccomp_filter *filter, void __user *buf) @@ -1467,7 +1498,7 @@ static long seccomp_notify_recv(struct seccomp_filter *filter, memset(&unotif, 0, sizeof(unotif)); - ret = down_interruptible(&filter->notif->request); + ret = recv_wait_event(filter); if (ret < 0) return ret; @@ -1515,7 +1546,8 @@ out: if (should_sleep_killable(filter, knotif)) complete(&knotif->ready); knotif->state = SECCOMP_NOTIFY_INIT; - up(&filter->notif->request); + atomic_inc(&filter->notif->requests); + wake_up_poll(&filter->wqh, EPOLLIN | EPOLLRDNORM); } mutex_unlock(&filter->notify_lock); } @@ -1777,7 +1809,6 @@ static struct file *init_listener(struct seccomp_filter *filter) if (!filter->notif) goto out; - sema_init(&filter->notif->request, 0); filter->notif->next_id = get_random_u64(); INIT_LIST_HEAD(&filter->notif->notifications); -- cgit