From: Baokun Li <libaokun@huaweicloud.com>
To: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, tytso@mit.edu
Cc: adilger.kernel@dilger.ca, jack@suse.cz, ritesh.list@gmail.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, yangerkun@huawei.com,
Baokun Li <libaokun1@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ext4: fix uninitialized ratelimit_state->lock access in __ext4_fill_super()
Date: Fri, 3 May 2024 10:09:07 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <afc46ac9-e3a2-b07f-c902-a9586c420824@huaweicloud.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a1874551-7e02-aa0d-9ef7-4322e920c661@huaweicloud.com>
Hi Ted,
Would you consider merging in this patch in the current merge
window? This patch has been merged in our internal branch for
a while now and so far it is safe.
Regards,
Baokun
On 2024/4/23 9:41, Baokun Li wrote:
> Gently ping again.
>
> On 2024/1/2 21:37, Baokun Li wrote:
>> In the following concurrency we will access the uninitialized rs->lock:
>>
>> ext4_fill_super
>> ext4_register_sysfs
>> // sysfs registered msg_ratelimit_interval_ms
>> // Other processes modify rs->interval to
>> // non-zero via msg_ratelimit_interval_ms
>> ext4_orphan_cleanup
>> ext4_msg(sb, KERN_INFO, "Errors on filesystem, "
>> __ext4_msg
>> ___ratelimit(&(EXT4_SB(sb)->s_msg_ratelimit_state)
>> if (!rs->interval) // do nothing if interval is 0
>> return 1;
>> raw_spin_trylock_irqsave(&rs->lock, flags)
>> raw_spin_trylock(lock)
>> _raw_spin_trylock
>> __raw_spin_trylock
>> spin_acquire(&lock->dep_map, 0, 1, _RET_IP_)
>> lock_acquire
>> __lock_acquire
>> register_lock_class
>> assign_lock_key
>> dump_stack();
>> ratelimit_state_init(&sbi->s_msg_ratelimit_state, 5 * HZ, 10);
>> raw_spin_lock_init(&rs->lock);
>> // init rs->lock here
>>
>> and get the following dump_stack:
>>
>> =========================================================
>> INFO: trying to register non-static key.
>> The code is fine but needs lockdep annotation, or maybe
>> you didn't initialize this object before use?
>> turning off the locking correctness validator.
>> CPU: 12 PID: 753 Comm: mount Tainted: G E 6.7.0-rc6-next-20231222 #504
>> [...]
>> Call Trace:
>> dump_stack_lvl+0xc5/0x170
>> dump_stack+0x18/0x30
>> register_lock_class+0x740/0x7c0
>> __lock_acquire+0x69/0x13a0
>> lock_acquire+0x120/0x450
>> _raw_spin_trylock+0x98/0xd0
>> ___ratelimit+0xf6/0x220
>> __ext4_msg+0x7f/0x160 [ext4]
>> ext4_orphan_cleanup+0x665/0x740 [ext4]
>> __ext4_fill_super+0x21ea/0x2b10 [ext4]
>> ext4_fill_super+0x14d/0x360 [ext4]
>> [...]
>> =========================================================
>>
>> Normally interval is 0 until s_msg_ratelimit_state is initialized, so
>> ___ratelimit() does nothing. But registering sysfs precedes initializing
>> rs->lock, so it is possible to change rs->interval to a non-zero value
>> via the msg_ratelimit_interval_ms interface of sysfs while rs->lock is
>> uninitialized, and then a call to ext4_msg triggers the problem by
>> accessing an uninitialized rs->lock. Therefore register sysfs after all
>> initializations are complete to avoid such problems.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Baokun Li <libaokun1@huawei.com>
>> ---
>> fs/ext4/super.c | 22 ++++++++++------------
>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/ext4/super.c b/fs/ext4/super.c
>> index 0980845c8b8f..1db23b0e8a4f 100644
>> --- a/fs/ext4/super.c
>> +++ b/fs/ext4/super.c
>> @@ -5564,19 +5564,15 @@ static int __ext4_fill_super(struct
>> fs_context *fc, struct super_block *sb)
>> if (err)
>> goto failed_mount6;
>> - err = ext4_register_sysfs(sb);
>> - if (err)
>> - goto failed_mount7;
>> -
>> err = ext4_init_orphan_info(sb);
>> if (err)
>> - goto failed_mount8;
>> + goto failed_mount7;
>> #ifdef CONFIG_QUOTA
>> /* Enable quota usage during mount. */
>> if (ext4_has_feature_quota(sb) && !sb_rdonly(sb)) {
>> err = ext4_enable_quotas(sb);
>> if (err)
>> - goto failed_mount9;
>> + goto failed_mount8;
>> }
>> #endif /* CONFIG_QUOTA */
>> @@ -5602,7 +5598,7 @@ static int __ext4_fill_super(struct
>> fs_context *fc, struct super_block *sb)
>> ext4_msg(sb, KERN_INFO, "recovery complete");
>> err = ext4_mark_recovery_complete(sb, es);
>> if (err)
>> - goto failed_mount10;
>> + goto failed_mount9;
>> }
>> if (test_opt(sb, DISCARD) &&
>> !bdev_max_discard_sectors(sb->s_bdev))
>> @@ -5619,15 +5615,17 @@ static int __ext4_fill_super(struct
>> fs_context *fc, struct super_block *sb)
>> atomic_set(&sbi->s_warning_count, 0);
>> atomic_set(&sbi->s_msg_count, 0);
>> + /* Register sysfs after all initializations are complete. */
>> + err = ext4_register_sysfs(sb);
>> + if (err)
>> + goto failed_mount9;
>> +
>> return 0;
>> -failed_mount10:
>> +failed_mount9:
>> ext4_quotas_off(sb, EXT4_MAXQUOTAS);
>> -failed_mount9: __maybe_unused
>> +failed_mount8: __maybe_unused
>> ext4_release_orphan_info(sb);
>> -failed_mount8:
>> - ext4_unregister_sysfs(sb);
>> - kobject_put(&sbi->s_kobj);
>> failed_mount7:
>> ext4_unregister_li_request(sb);
>> failed_mount6:
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-05-03 2:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-01-02 13:37 [PATCH] ext4: fix uninitialized ratelimit_state->lock access in __ext4_fill_super() Baokun Li
2024-01-03 9:06 ` Jan Kara
2024-02-27 7:51 ` Baokun Li
2024-04-23 1:41 ` Baokun Li
2024-05-03 2:09 ` Baokun Li [this message]
2024-05-09 14:42 ` Theodore Ts'o
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=afc46ac9-e3a2-b07f-c902-a9586c420824@huaweicloud.com \
--to=libaokun@huaweicloud.com \
--cc=adilger.kernel@dilger.ca \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=libaokun1@huawei.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ritesh.list@gmail.com \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=yangerkun@huawei.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).