From: Trond Myklebust <trondmy@kernel.org>
To: Aiden Lambert <alambert48@gatech.edu>,
anna@kernel.org, chuck.lever@oracle.org, jlayton@kernel.org
Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] NFS: ensure nfs_safe_remove() atomic nlink drop
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2025 13:24:54 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3fa28515be621f91f237d323ff4b97430e73b032.camel@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <qqu6ndrq6ytkt7rfe7hw62iu34fkt6eckixjgx7bkhqgvzvcm6@h4tj3bkvvidi>
On Mon, 2025-11-17 at 13:03 -0500, Aiden Lambert wrote:
> A race condition occurs when both unlink() and link() are running
> concurrently on the same inode, and the nlink count from the nfs
> server
> received in link()->nfs_do_access() clobbers the nlink count of the
> inode in nfs_safe_remove() after the "remove" RPC is made to the
> server
> but before we decrement the link count. If the nlink value from
> nfs_do_access() reflects the decremented nlink of the "remove" RPC, a
> double decrement occurs, which can lead to the dropping of the client
> side inode, causing the link call to return ENOENT. To fix this, we
> record an expected nlink value before the "remove" RPC and compare it
> with the value afterwards---if these two are the same, the drop is
> performed. Note that this does not take into account nlink values
> that
> are a result of multi-client (un)link operations as these are not
> guaranteed to be atomic by the NFS spec.
Why do we end up running nfs_do_access() at all in the above test? That
sounds like a bug. We shouldn't ever need to validate if we can create
or delete things using ACCESS. That just ends up producing an
unnecessary TOCTOU race.
--
Trond Myklebust
Linux NFS client maintainer, Hammerspace
trondmy@kernel.org, trond.myklebust@hammerspace.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-11-17 18:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-11-17 18:03 [PATCH] NFS: ensure nfs_safe_remove() atomic nlink drop Aiden Lambert
2025-11-17 18:24 ` Trond Myklebust [this message]
2025-11-17 18:57 ` Aiden Lambert
2025-11-17 22:41 ` Trond Myklebust
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3fa28515be621f91f237d323ff4b97430e73b032.camel@kernel.org \
--to=trondmy@kernel.org \
--cc=alambert48@gatech.edu \
--cc=anna@kernel.org \
--cc=chuck.lever@oracle.org \
--cc=jlayton@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.