sched: Use rcu in sys_sched_getscheduler/sys_sched_getparam()
read_lock(&tasklist_lock) does not protect
sys_sched_getscheduler and sys_sched_getparam() against a
concurrent update of the policy or scheduler parameters as
do_sched_setscheduler() does not take the tasklist_lock. The
accessed integers can be retrieved w/o locking and are snapshots
anyway.
Using rcu_read_lock() to protect find_task_by_vpid() and prevent
the task struct from going away is not changing the above
situation.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
LKML-Reference: <20091209100706.753790977@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
diff --git a/kernel/sched.c b/kernel/sched.c
index 258c73c..1782bee 100644
--- a/kernel/sched.c
+++ b/kernel/sched.c
@@ -6458,7 +6458,7 @@
return -EINVAL;
retval = -ESRCH;
- read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
+ rcu_read_lock();
p = find_process_by_pid(pid);
if (p) {
retval = security_task_getscheduler(p);
@@ -6466,7 +6466,7 @@
retval = p->policy
| (p->sched_reset_on_fork ? SCHED_RESET_ON_FORK : 0);
}
- read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
+ rcu_read_unlock();
return retval;
}
@@ -6484,7 +6484,7 @@
if (!param || pid < 0)
return -EINVAL;
- read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
+ rcu_read_lock();
p = find_process_by_pid(pid);
retval = -ESRCH;
if (!p)
@@ -6495,7 +6495,7 @@
goto out_unlock;
lp.sched_priority = p->rt_priority;
- read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
+ rcu_read_unlock();
/*
* This one might sleep, we cannot do it with a spinlock held ...
@@ -6505,7 +6505,7 @@
return retval;
out_unlock:
- read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
+ rcu_read_unlock();
return retval;
}