Merge Linus master into drm-next

The merge is clean, but the arm build fails afterwards,
due to API changes in the regulator tree.

I've included the patch into the merge to fix the build.

Signed-off-by: Dave Airlie <airlied@redhat.com>

1 files changed, 29 insertions, 10 deletions

diff --git a/kernel/ptrace.c b/kernel/ptrace.c
index 227fec36b12a..c8e0e050a36a 100644
--- a/kernel/ptrace.c
+++ b/kernel/ptrace.c
@@ -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;
 }
@@ -697,6 +696,8 @@ 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 +725,26 @@ 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;
 }