From: Josef Bacik <josef@redhat.com>
To: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
Cc: Josef Bacik <josef@redhat.com>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, eparis@redhat.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs: call security_d_instantiate in d_obtain_alias
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 14:28:22 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101117192822.GB3818@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20101117191817.GA26575@fieldses.org>
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 02:18:17PM -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 12:51:03PM -0500, Josef Bacik wrote:
> > While trying to track down some NFS problems with BTRFS, I kept noticing I was
> > getting -EACCESS for no apparent reason. Eric Paris and printk() helped me
> > figure out that it was SELinux that was giving me grief, with the following
> > denial
> >
> > type=AVC msg=audit(1290013638.413:95): avc: denied { 0x800000 } for pid=1772
> > comm="nfsd" name="" dev=sda1 ino=256 scontext=system_u:system_r:kernel_t:s0
> > tcontext=system_u:object_r:unlabeled_t:s0 tclass=file
> >
> > Turns out this is because in d_obtain_alias if we can't find an alias we create
> > one and do all the normal instantiation stuff, but we don't do the
> > security_d_instantiate. With this patch I'm no longer seeing these errant
> > -EACCESS return values. Thanks,
>
> Possibly dumb question: Is there still a small race here? Is it
> possible for another nfsd thread to find the new alias on the list while
> this thread is still:
>
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <josef@redhat.com>
> > ---
> > fs/dcache.c | 1 +
> > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/dcache.c b/fs/dcache.c
> > index 23702a9..890a59e 100644
> > --- a/fs/dcache.c
> > +++ b/fs/dcache.c
> > @@ -1201,6 +1201,7 @@ struct dentry *d_obtain_alias(struct inode *inode)
> > spin_unlock(&tmp->d_lock);
> >
> > spin_unlock(&dcache_lock);
>
> ... right here, so that that other nfsd thread still ends up trying to
> do something with a dentry that hasn't had security_d_instantiate called
> on it yet?
>
> > + security_d_instantiate(tmp, inode);
> > return tmp;
> >
> > out_iput:
> > --
>
> Or does something else prevent that?
>
That's a good question, I have no idea actually. Every other consumer of
security_d_instantiate seems to hold the i_mutex of the parent directory inode,
tho I'm not sure if that is appropriate for d_obtain_alias, maybe somebody else
has an idea? Thanks,
Josef
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-11-17 19:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-11-17 17:51 [PATCH] fs: call security_d_instantiate in d_obtain_alias Josef Bacik
2010-11-17 18:54 ` Eric Paris
2010-11-17 19:18 ` J. Bruce Fields
2010-11-17 19:28 ` Josef Bacik [this message]
2010-11-17 20:26 ` J. Bruce Fields
2010-11-17 22:12 ` Eric Paris
2010-11-18 1:43 ` Josef Bacik
2010-11-19 5:28 ` David Quigley
2010-11-19 16:42 ` J. Bruce Fields
2010-11-20 16:38 ` Dave Quigley
2010-11-29 20:23 ` J. Bruce Fields
2010-11-17 20:27 ` Josef Bacik
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=20101117192822.GB3818@localhost.localdomain \
--to=josef@redhat.com \
--cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
--cc=eparis@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@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 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).