From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 685BCC001DB for ; Mon, 14 Aug 2023 18:43:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231576AbjHNSmt (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Aug 2023 14:42:49 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:37330 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229648AbjHNSmR (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Aug 2023 14:42:17 -0400 Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org (dfw.source.kernel.org [139.178.84.217]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0D3CCE73; Mon, 14 Aug 2023 11:42:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9E87F628ED; Mon, 14 Aug 2023 18:42:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B1DA8C433C8; Mon, 14 Aug 2023 18:42:15 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1692038536; bh=cRZ0oe4bGlgMnSjDZmU1ziyvNS/S6FdTSbvDRpoiBVw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=smEVnz1dXlTZYP+snx+W94hNAvr5efHMO9iywxqCxACPnx7o1llXZSAd1PADdsTks W0JGwBYKhcQg2g00Wdv2eXHtHnL3NjvOq/ONxPrFmYKbzbmWAHaiYVUA47EXfNLzmz NJhUirjgDx4/MePzu1VQXsr4oH7h6/Wdjj2xzmglehsEkI4mtgBMHndjQe6ss4gRAj smEQKPTlw/5bi5eTEJBlIWLwrL0hWUltprMGyc8QCUTkJG9jqoJUUjiEI6izNDHqDe y2kDbQJxk4e2BwFanRKIZOq3MBEPR0ZLaBMT4kYFCSdFaYtG//kXD/GQdhRaqQMlm1 U1yogfMOOVlPA== Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2023 11:42:14 -0700 From: Eric Biggers To: Gabriel Krisman Bertazi Cc: viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, brauner@kernel.org, tytso@mit.edu, jaegeuk@kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Gabriel Krisman Bertazi Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 06/10] libfs: Validate negative dentries in case-insensitive directories Message-ID: <20230814184214.GB1171@sol.localdomain> References: <20230812004146.30980-1-krisman@suse.de> <20230812004146.30980-7-krisman@suse.de> <20230812024145.GD971@sol.localdomain> <87a5ut7k62.fsf@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87a5ut7k62.fsf@suse.de> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Aug 14, 2023 at 10:50:13AM -0400, Gabriel Krisman Bertazi wrote: > Eric Biggers writes: > > > On Fri, Aug 11, 2023 at 08:41:42PM -0400, Gabriel Krisman Bertazi wrote: > >> + /* > >> + * Filesystems will call into d_revalidate without setting > >> + * LOOKUP_ flags even for file creation (see lookup_one* > >> + * variants). Reject negative dentries in this case, since we > >> + * can't know for sure it won't be used for creation. > >> + */ > >> + if (!flags) > >> + return 0; > >> + > >> + /* > >> + * If the lookup is for creation, then a negative dentry can > >> + * only be reused if it's a case-sensitive match, not just a > >> + * case-insensitive one. This is needed to make the new file be > >> + * created with the name the user specified, preserving case. > >> + */ > >> + if (flags & (LOOKUP_CREATE | LOOKUP_RENAME_TARGET)) { > >> + /* > >> + * ->d_name won't change from under us in the creation > >> + * path only, since d_revalidate during creation and > >> + * renames is always called with the parent inode > >> + * locked. It isn't the case for all lookup callpaths, > >> + * so ->d_name must not be touched outside > >> + * (LOOKUP_CREATE|LOOKUP_RENAME_TARGET) context. > >> + */ > >> + if (dentry->d_name.len != name->len || > >> + memcmp(dentry->d_name.name, name->name, name->len)) > >> + return 0; > >> + } > > > > This is still really confusing to me. Can you consider the below? The code is > > the same except for the reordering, but the explanation is reworked to be much > > clearer (IMO). Anything I am misunderstanding? > > > > /* > > * If the lookup is for creation, then a negative dentry can only be > > * reused if it's a case-sensitive match, not just a case-insensitive > > * one. This is needed to make the new file be created with the name > > * the user specified, preserving case. > > * > > * LOOKUP_CREATE or LOOKUP_RENAME_TARGET cover most creations. In these > > * cases, ->d_name is stable and can be compared to 'name' without > > * taking ->d_lock because the caller holds dir->i_rwsem for write. > > * (This is because the directory lock blocks the dentry from being > > * concurrently instantiated, and negative dentries are never moved.) > > * > > * All other creations actually use flags==0. These come from the edge > > * case of filesystems calling functions like lookup_one() that do a > > * lookup without setting the lookup flags at all. Such lookups might > > * or might not be for creation, and if not don't guarantee stable > > * ->d_name. Therefore, invalidate all negative dentries when flags==0. > > */ > > if (flags & (LOOKUP_CREATE | LOOKUP_RENAME_TARGET)) { > > if (dentry->d_name.len != name->len || > > memcmp(dentry->d_name.name, name->name, name->len)) > > return 0; > > } > > if (!flags) > > return 0; > > I don't see it as particularly better or less confusing than the > original. but I also don't mind taking it into the next iteration. > Your commit message is still much longer and covers some quite different details which seem irrelevant to me. So if you don't see my explanation as being much different, I think we're still not on the same page. I hope that I'm not misunderstanding anything, in which I believe that what I wrote above is a good explanation and your commit message should be substantially simplified. Remember, longer != better. Keep things as simple as possible. - Eric