From d8c633766ad88527f25d9f81a5c2f083d78a2b39 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Manfred Spraul Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2013 13:45:07 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] ipc/sem.c: synchronize the proc interface The proc interface is not aware of sem_lock(), it instead calls ipc_lock_object() directly. This means that simple semop() operations can run in parallel with the proc interface. Right now, this is uncritical, because the implementation doesn't do anything that requires a proper synchronization. But it is dangerous and therefore should be fixed. Signed-off-by: Manfred Spraul Cc: Davidlohr Bueso Cc: Mike Galbraith Cc: Rik van Riel Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds --- ipc/sem.c | 8 ++++++++ 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) diff --git a/ipc/sem.c b/ipc/sem.c index e20658d76bb5..cd6a733011a2 100644 --- a/ipc/sem.c +++ b/ipc/sem.c @@ -2103,6 +2103,14 @@ static int sysvipc_sem_proc_show(struct seq_file *s, void *it) struct sem_array *sma = it; time_t sem_otime; + /* + * The proc interface isn't aware of sem_lock(), it calls + * ipc_lock_object() directly (in sysvipc_find_ipc). + * In order to stay compatible with sem_lock(), we must wait until + * all simple semop() calls have left their critical regions. + */ + sem_wait_array(sma); + sem_otime = get_semotime(sma); return seq_printf(s, -- 2.39.5