On Fri, 2021-10-22 at 15:13 +0100, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
On 6/9/21 21:17, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
quoted
Folks,
Olivier Langlois has been struggling with coredumps getting
truncated in
tasks using io_uring. He has also apparently been struggling with
the some of his email messages not making it to the lists.
Looks syzbot hit something relevant, see
https://lore.kernel.org/io-
uring/0000000000000012fb05cee99477@google.com/
In short, a task creates an io_uring worker thread, then the worker
submits a task_work item to the creator task and won't die until
the item is executed/cancelled. And I found that the creator task is
sleeping in do_coredump() -> wait_for_completion()
0xffffffff81343ccb is in do_coredump (fs/coredump.c:469).
464
465 if (core_waiters > 0) {
466 struct core_thread *ptr;
467
468 freezer_do_not_count();
469 wait_for_completion(&core_state->startup);
470 freezer_count();
A hack executing tws there helps (see diff below).
Any chance anyone knows what this is and how to fix it?
diff --git a/fs/coredump.c b/fs/coredump.c
index 3224dee44d30..f6f9dfb02296 100644
--- a/fs/coredump.c
+++ b/fs/coredump.c
@@ -466,7 +466,8 @@ static int coredump_wait(int exit_code, struct
core_state *core_state)
struct core_thread *ptr;
freezer_do_not_count();
- wait_for_completion(&core_state->startup);
+ while (wait_for_completion_interruptible(&core_state-
quoted
startup))
+ tracehook_notify_signal();
freezer_count();
/*
* Wait for all the threads to become inactive, so that
Pavel,
I cannot comment on the merit of the proposed hack but my proposed
patch to fix the coredump truncation issue when a process using
io_uring core dumps that I submitted back in August is still
unreviewed!
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1625bc89782bf83d9d8c7c63e8ffcb651ccb15fa.1629655338.git.olivier@trillion01.com/ (local)
I have been using it since then I must have generated many dozens of
perfect core dump files with it and I have not seen a single truncated
core dump files like I used to have prior to the patch.
I am bringing back my patch to your attention because one nice side
effect of it is that it would have avoided totally the problem that you
have encountered in coredump_wait() since it does cancel io_uring
resources before calling coredump_wait()!
Greetings,
Olivier