introduce for_each_thread() to replace the buggy while_each_thread()

while_each_thread() and next_thread() should die, almost every lockless
usage is wrong.

1. Unless g == current, the lockless while_each_thread() is not safe.

   while_each_thread(g, t) can loop forever if g exits, next_thread()
   can't reach the unhashed thread in this case. Note that this can
   happen even if g is the group leader, it can exec.

2. Even if while_each_thread() itself was correct, people often use
   it wrongly.

   It was never safe to just take rcu_read_lock() and loop unless
   you verify that pid_alive(g) == T, even the first next_thread()
   can point to the already freed/reused memory.

This patch adds signal_struct->thread_head and task->thread_node to
create the normal rcu-safe list with the stable head.  The new
for_each_thread(g, t) helper is always safe under rcu_read_lock() as
long as this task_struct can't go away.

Note: of course it is ugly to have both task_struct->thread_node and the
old task_struct->thread_group, we will kill it later, after we change
the users of while_each_thread() to use for_each_thread().

Perhaps we can kill it even before we convert all users, we can
reimplement next_thread(t) using the new thread_head/thread_node.  But
we can't do this right now because this will lead to subtle behavioural
changes.  For example, do/while_each_thread() always sees at least one
task, while for_each_thread() can do nothing if the whole thread group
has died.  Or thread_group_empty(), currently its semantics is not clear
unless thread_group_leader(p) and we need to audit the callers before we
can change it.

So this patch adds the new interface which has to coexist with the old
one for some time, hopefully the next changes will be more or less
straightforward and the old one will go away soon.

Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Sergey Dyasly <dserrg@gmail.com>
Tested-by: Sergey Dyasly <dserrg@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Sameer Nanda <snanda@chromium.org>
Acked-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Cc: Mandeep Singh Baines <msb@chromium.org>
Cc: "Ma, Xindong" <xindong.ma@intel.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
Cc: "Tu, Xiaobing" <xiaobing.tu@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
oom_kill: change oom_kill.c to use for_each_thread()

Change oom_kill.c to use for_each_thread() rather than the racy
while_each_thread() which can loop forever if we race with exit.

Note also that most users were buggy even if while_each_thread() was
fine, the task can exit even _before_ rcu_read_lock().

Fortunately the new for_each_thread() only requires the stable
task_struct, so this change fixes both problems.

Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Sergey Dyasly <dserrg@gmail.com>
Tested-by: Sergey Dyasly <dserrg@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Sameer Nanda <snanda@chromium.org>
Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Cc: Mandeep Singh Baines <msb@chromium.org>
Cc: "Ma, Xindong" <xindong.ma@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
Cc: "Tu, Xiaobing" <xiaobing.tu@intel.com>
Acked-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
oom_kill: has_intersects_mems_allowed() needs rcu_read_lock()

At least out_of_memory() calls has_intersects_mems_allowed() without
even rcu_read_lock(), this is obviously buggy.

Add the necessary rcu_read_lock().  This means that we can not simply
return from the loop, we need "bool ret" and "break".

While at it, swap the names of task_struct's (the argument and the
local).  This cleans up the code a little bit and avoids the unnecessary
initialization.

Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Sergey Dyasly <dserrg@gmail.com>
Tested-by: Sergey Dyasly <dserrg@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Sameer Nanda <snanda@chromium.org>
Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Cc: Mandeep Singh Baines <msb@chromium.org>
Cc: "Ma, Xindong" <xindong.ma@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
Cc: "Tu, Xiaobing" <xiaobing.tu@intel.com>
Acked-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
oom_kill: add rcu_read_lock() into find_lock_task_mm()

find_lock_task_mm() expects it is called under rcu or tasklist lock, but
it seems that at least oom_unkillable_task()->task_in_mem_cgroup() and
mem_cgroup_out_of_memory()->oom_badness() can call it lockless.

Perhaps we could fix the callers, but this patch simply adds rcu lock
into find_lock_task_mm().  This also allows to simplify a bit one of its
callers, oom_kill_process().

Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: Sergey Dyasly <dserrg@gmail.com>
Cc: Sameer Nanda <snanda@chromium.org>
Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Cc: Mandeep Singh Baines <msb@chromium.org>
Cc: "Ma, Xindong" <xindong.ma@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
Cc: "Tu, Xiaobing" <xiaobing.tu@intel.com>
Acked-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>