ptrace: fix race between ptrace_resume() and wait_task_stopped()

Great! Thanks a lot for the detailed/clear report and testing.

So I am sending this fix + another patch. 2/2 is "while at it" change, just because ptrace_detach() can resume the tracee with the new code too, so it makes sense to add a comment and remove the outdated logic.

Hmm, perhaps we have (yet) another bug... please let me know if/when you have more details.

Yes sure, this will hide the problem.

No, SIGKILL can be never reported. But note that ptrace_stop() does

	set_current_state(TASK_TRACED);

	current->last_siginfo = info;
	current->exit_code = exit_code;

and this is another case when wait_task_stopped() can consume/report this exit_code even if the tracee won't actually stop because it is killed.

Usually this is not that bad, we can pretend that it was killed after stop. Still this can confuse the debugger which sends SIGKILL to the stopped tracee. We need more fatal_signal_pending() checks in ptrace_stop(). And in fact in get_signal(), I think. The problem is that we need other cleanups here. But fortunately this problem is minor.

Oleg.

ptrace_resume() is called when the tracee is still __TASK_TRACED. We set tracee->exit_code and then wake_up_state() changes tracee->state. If the tracer's sub-thread does wait() in between, task_stopped_code(ptrace => T) wrongly looks like another report from tracee.

This confuses debugger, and since wait_task_stopped() clears ->exit_code the tracee can miss a signal.

Test-case:

	#include <stdio.h>
	#include <unistd.h>
	#include <sys/wait.h>
	#include <sys/ptrace.h>
	#include <pthread.h>
	#include <assert.h>

	int pid;

	void *waiter(void *arg)
	{
		int stat;

		for (;;) {
			assert(pid == wait(&stat));
			assert(WIFSTOPPED(stat));
			if (WSTOPSIG(stat) == SIGHUP)
				continue;

			assert(WSTOPSIG(stat) == SIGCONT);
			printf("ERR! extra/wrong report:%x\n", stat);
		}
	}

	int main(void)
	{
		pthread_t thread;

		pid = fork();
		if (!pid) {
			assert(ptrace(PTRACE_TRACEME, 0,0,0) == 0);
			for (;;)
				kill(getpid(), SIGHUP);
		}

		assert(pthread_create(&thread, NULL, waiter, NULL) == 0);

		for (;;)
			ptrace(PTRACE_CONT, pid, 0, SIGCONT);

		return 0;
	}

Note for stable: the bug is very old, but without 9899d11f6544 "ptrace:
ensure arch_ptrace/ptrace_request can never race with SIGKILL" the fix should use lock_task_sighand(child).

---
 kernel/ptrace.c |   20 ++++++++++++++++++++
 1 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

index 1eb9d90..5009263 100644
@@ -697,6 +697,8 @@ static int ptrace_peek_siginfo(struct task_struct *child,
 static int ptrace_resume(struct task_struct *child, long request,
 			 unsigned long data)
 {
+	bool need_siglock;
+
 	if (!valid_signal(data))
 		return -EIO;
 

@@ -724,8 +726,26 @@ static int ptrace_resume(struct task_struct *child, long request,
 		user_disable_single_step(child);
 	}
 
+	/*
+	 * Change ->exit_code and ->state under siglock to avoid the race
+	 * with wait_task_stopped() in between; a non-zero ->exit_code will
+	 * wrongly look like another report from tracee.
+	 *
+	 * Note that we need siglock even if ->exit_code == data and/or this
+	 * status was not reported yet, the new status must not be cleared by
+	 * wait_task_stopped() after resume.
+	 *
+	 * If data == 0 we do not care if wait_task_stopped() reports the old
+	 * status and clears the code too; this can't race with the tracee, it
+	 * takes siglock after resume.
+	 */
+	need_siglock = data && !thread_group_empty(current);
+	if (need_siglock)
+		spin_lock_irq(&child->sighand->siglock);
 	child->exit_code = data;
 	wake_up_state(child, __TASK_TRACED);
+	if (need_siglock)
+		spin_unlock_irq(&child->sighand->siglock);
 
 	return 0;
 }

1.5.5.1

ptrace_detach() re-checks ->ptrace under tasklist lock and calls release_task() if __ptrace_detach() returns true. This was needed because the __TASK_TRACED tracee could be killed/untraced, and it could even pass exit_notify() before we take tasklist_lock.

But this is no longer possible after 9899d11f6544 "ptrace: ensure arch_ptrace/ptrace_request can never race with SIGKILL". We can turn these checks into WARN_ON() and remove release_task().

While at it, document the setting of child->exit_code.

---
 kernel/ptrace.c |   19 +++++++++----------
 1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

index 5009263..23be9dd 100644
@@ -456,8 +456,6 @@ static bool __ptrace_detach(struct task_struct *tracer, struct task_struct *p)
 
 static int ptrace_detach(struct task_struct *child, unsigned int data)
 {
-	bool dead = false;
-
 	if (!valid_signal(data))
 		return -EIO;
 

@@ -467,18 +465,19 @@ static int ptrace_detach(struct task_struct *child, unsigned int data)
 
 	write_lock_irq(&tasklist_lock);
 	/*
-	 * This child can be already killed. Make sure de_thread() or
-	 * our sub-thread doing do_wait() didn't do release_task() yet.
+	 * We rely on ptrace_freeze_traced(). It can't be killed and
+	 * untraced by another thread, it can't be a zombie.
 	 */
-	if (child->ptrace) {
-		child->exit_code = data;
-		dead = __ptrace_detach(current, child);
-	}
+	WARN_ON(!child->ptrace || child->exit_state);
+	/*
+	 * tasklist_lock avoids the race with wait_task_stopped(), see
+	 * the comment in ptrace_resume().
+	 */
+	child->exit_code = data;
+	__ptrace_detach(current, child);
 	write_unlock_irq(&tasklist_lock);
 
 	proc_ptrace_connector(child, PTRACE_DETACH);
-	if (unlikely(dead))
-		release_task(child);
 
 	return 0;
 }

1.5.5.1