[PATCH 1/3] io_uring: Fix resource leaking when kill the process

From: Muchun Song <hidden>
Date: 2020-09-15 08:23:44
Also in: linux-fsdevel, lkml, stable
Subsystem: filesystems (vfs and infrastructure), the rest · Maintainers: Alexander Viro, Christian Brauner, Linus Torvalds

From: Yinyin Zhu <redacted>

The commit <1c4404efcf2c0> ("<io_uring: make sure async workqueue is
canceled on exit>") doesn't solve the resource leak problem totally!
When kworker is doing a io task for the io_uring, The process which
submitted the io task has received a SIGKILL signal from the user.
Then the io_cancel_async_work function could have sent a SIGINT
signal to the kworker, but the judging condition is wrong. So it
doesn't send a SIGINT signal to the kworker, then caused the resource
leaking problem. Why the juding condition is wrong? Think that
The process is a multi-threaded process, we call the thread of the
process which has submitted the io task Thread1. So  the req->task
is the current macro of the Thread1. when all the threads of
the process have done exit procedure, the last thread will call the
io_cancel_async_work, but the last thread may not the Thread1,
so the req->task is not equal to the task. so it doesn't
send the SIGINT signal. To fix this bug, we alter the task attribute
of the req with struct files_struct. And the judging condition is
"req->files == files"

Fixes: 1c4404efcf2c0 ("io_uring: make sure async workqueue is canceled on exit")
Signed-off-by: Yinyin Zhu <redacted>
---
 fs/io_uring.c | 10 +++++-----
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/io_uring.c b/fs/io_uring.c
index e0200406765c3..de4f7b3a0d789 100644
--- a/fs/io_uring.c
+++ b/fs/io_uring.c

@@ -339,7 +339,7 @@ struct io_kiocb {
 	u64			user_data;
 	u32			result;
 	u32			sequence;
-	struct task_struct	*task;
+	struct files_struct	*files;
 
 	struct fs_struct	*fs;

@@ -513,7 +513,7 @@ static inline void io_queue_async_work(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
 		}
 	}
 
-	req->task = current;
+	req->files = current->files;
 
 	spin_lock_irqsave(&ctx->task_lock, flags);
 	list_add(&req->task_list, &ctx->task_list);

@@ -3708,7 +3708,7 @@ static int io_uring_fasync(int fd, struct file *file, int on)
 }
 
 static void io_cancel_async_work(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
-				 struct task_struct *task)
+				 struct files_struct *files)
 {
 	if (list_empty(&ctx->task_list))
 		return;

@@ -3720,7 +3720,7 @@ static void io_cancel_async_work(struct io_ring_ctx *ctx,
 		req = list_first_entry(&ctx->task_list, struct io_kiocb, task_list);
 		list_del_init(&req->task_list);
 		req->flags |= REQ_F_CANCEL;
-		if (req->work_task && (!task || req->task == task))
+		if (req->work_task && (!files || req->files == files))
 			send_sig(SIGINT, req->work_task, 1);
 	}
 	spin_unlock_irq(&ctx->task_lock);

@@ -3745,7 +3745,7 @@ static int io_uring_flush(struct file *file, void *data)
 	struct io_ring_ctx *ctx = file->private_data;
 
 	if (fatal_signal_pending(current) || (current->flags & PF_EXITING))
-		io_cancel_async_work(ctx, current);
+		io_cancel_async_work(ctx, data);
 
 	return 0;
 }

-- 
2.11.0

`h`	back out one level
`j`	next message in thread
`k`	previous message in thread
`l`	drill in
`Esc`	close help / fold thread tree
`?`	toggle this help