From: Jeff Layton <jeff.layton@primarydata.com>
To: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>,
"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@oracle.com>
Subject: [PATCH 3/4] locks: when upgrading, don't remove old flock lock until replacing with new one
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2015 07:46:29 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1424177190-14252-4-git-send-email-jeff.layton@primarydata.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1424177190-14252-1-git-send-email-jeff.layton@primarydata.com>
There is a potential problem when upgrading a flock lock. Suppose we
have a LOCK_SH lock on a file, and then want to upgrade it to a LOCK_EX
lock. We go through the first loop in flock_lock_file, and remove the
first lock.
We then go through the second loop and try to insert a new LOCK_EX lock.
If however, there is another LOCK_SH lock on the file, we're out of
luck. We've removed our LOCK_SH lock already and can't insert a LOCK_EX
lock.
Fix this by ensuring that we don't remove any lock that we're replacing
until we're sure that we can add its replacement.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jeff.layton@primarydata.com>
---
fs/locks.c | 22 +++++++++++++++++-----
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/locks.c b/fs/locks.c
index 00c105f499a2..59eadd416b8c 100644
--- a/fs/locks.c
+++ b/fs/locks.c
@@ -864,13 +864,16 @@ static int posix_locks_deadlock(struct file_lock *caller_fl,
static int flock_lock_file(struct file *filp, struct file_lock *request)
{
struct file_lock *new_fl = NULL;
+ struct file_lock *old_fl = NULL;
struct file_lock *fl;
struct file_lock_context *ctx;
struct inode *inode = file_inode(filp);
int error = 0;
- bool found = false;
LIST_HEAD(dispose);
+ /* flock_locks_conflict relies on this */
+ WARN_ON_ONCE(request->fl_file != filp);
+
ctx = locks_get_lock_context(inode);
if (!ctx)
return -ENOMEM;
@@ -885,22 +888,29 @@ static int flock_lock_file(struct file *filp, struct file_lock *request)
if (request->fl_flags & FL_ACCESS)
goto find_conflict;
+ /*
+ * Do we already hold a lock on this filp? It may be upgradeable, or it
+ * may be just what we need.
+ */
list_for_each_entry(fl, &ctx->flc_flock, fl_list) {
if (filp != fl->fl_file)
continue;
if (request->fl_type == fl->fl_type)
goto out;
- found = true;
- locks_delete_lock_ctx(fl, &dispose);
+ old_fl = fl;
break;
}
if (request->fl_type == F_UNLCK) {
- if ((request->fl_flags & FL_EXISTS) && !found)
- error = -ENOENT;
+ if (old_fl) {
+ locks_delete_lock_ctx(old_fl, &dispose);
+ if (request->fl_flags & FL_EXISTS)
+ error = -ENOENT;
+ }
goto out;
}
+ /* SETLK(W) */
find_conflict:
list_for_each_entry(fl, &ctx->flc_flock, fl_list) {
if (!flock_locks_conflict(request, fl))
@@ -915,6 +925,8 @@ find_conflict:
if (request->fl_flags & FL_ACCESS)
goto out;
locks_copy_lock(new_fl, request);
+ if (old_fl)
+ locks_delete_lock_ctx(old_fl, &dispose);
locks_insert_lock_ctx(new_fl, &ctx->flc_flock);
new_fl = NULL;
error = 0;
--
2.1.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-02-17 12:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-02-17 12:46 [PATCH 0/4] locks: flock and lease related bugfixes, and remove i_flctx counters Jeff Layton
2015-02-17 12:46 ` [PATCH 1/4] Revert "locks: keep a count of locks on the flctx lists" Jeff Layton
2015-02-17 12:46 ` [PATCH 2/4] locks: remove conditional lock release in middle of flock_lock_file Jeff Layton
2015-02-17 17:10 ` J. Bruce Fields
2015-02-17 17:56 ` Jeff Layton
2015-02-17 19:11 ` J. Bruce Fields
2015-02-17 22:21 ` J. Bruce Fields
2015-02-17 22:29 ` Jeff Layton
2015-02-17 12:46 ` Jeff Layton [this message]
2015-02-17 12:46 ` [PATCH 4/4] locks: only remove leases associated with the file being closed Jeff Layton
2015-02-17 19:55 ` [PATCH 0/4] locks: flock and lease related bugfixes, and remove i_flctx counters Linus Torvalds
2015-02-17 20:20 ` Linus Torvalds
2015-02-17 20:20 ` Al Viro
2015-02-17 21:10 ` Jeff Layton
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=1424177190-14252-4-git-send-email-jeff.layton@primarydata.com \
--to=jeff.layton@primarydata.com \
--cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=kirill@shutemov.name \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sasha.levin@oracle.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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 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).