linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [RFC] st_nlink after rmdir() and rename()
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 03:24:54 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110303032454.GI22723@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)

	We have an interesting problem.  Consider the following sequence
of syscalls:
	mkdir("foo", 0777);
	mkdir("bar", 0777);
	fd1 = open("foo", O_DIRECTORY);
	fd2 = open("bar", O_DIRECTORY);
	rename("foo", "bar");	/* kill old bar */
	rmdir("bar"); 		/* kill old foo */
	fstat(fd1, &buf1);
	fstat(fd2, &buf2);
What should be in buf1.st_nlink and buf2.st_nlink, if none of these
syscalls fail?  Note that in both cases any lookups in victim directory
will fail and so will readdir; as far as VFS is concerned, the effect of
such rmdir() and rename() on their victims are identical.  In particular,
both . and .. are gone, as explicitly required by POSIX in case of rmdir().

Surprisingly, the results are *NOT* identical wrt fstat(); for most of
the filesystems we will get 0 in both cases (as expected), but some will
leave 1 in buf2.st_nlink.  What we have is

0 0: ext*, xfs, jfs, reiserfs, ocfs2, gfs2, nilfs, exofs, udf, ubifs,
     minix, sysv, ufs, msdos, vfat, hfs+
0 1: ramfs, shmem, hugetlbfs, jffs2, omfs, hfs[*], apparently nfs as well
hell knows: ncpfs, fuse, ecryptfs, coda, cifs, ceph, btrfs, affs
1 1: (unless I'm misreading it) logfs
completely FUBAR wrt fstat(): hostfs[**]
-EEXIST on rename(): cgroup
-EINVAL on rename(): hpfs
server ought to fail such rename(): 9p
apparently fails rename(): smbfs
completely broken rename(): pohmelfs[***]

[*] yes, different from hfs+; the code is clearly broken, since it simply
does unlink() on target, without even verifying that it's empty.  And
yes, it's trivial fs corruption...
[**] even open() + unlink() + fstat() will report original st_nlink, etc.
[***] new_dir is target's _parent_ directory and it's not required to be
empty; it's never going to be NULL, while we are at it.  Code makes no
sense...

The variant with st_nlink getting to 0 in both cases is definitely the most
common and at least for local filesystems I think it should be mandatory.
I.e. ramfs and friends, jffs2, omfs and hfs should all switch to it.

Comments would be welcome; I really don't know the protocols of most of
the network filesystems well enough to tell what'll happen in these
situations.
				Al, digging through i_nlink code audit...

             reply	other threads:[~2011-03-03  3:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-03-03  3:24 Al Viro [this message]
2011-03-03  4:42 ` [RFC] st_nlink after rmdir() and rename() Al Viro
2011-03-03  5:17 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-03-03  6:03   ` Al Viro
2011-03-03 20:05     ` Linus Torvalds
2011-03-03 20:46       ` OGAWA Hirofumi
2011-03-03 20:50         ` OGAWA Hirofumi
2011-03-03 21:02         ` Linus Torvalds
2011-03-03 21:30           ` Al Viro
2011-03-03 21:37           ` OGAWA Hirofumi
2011-03-03 21:52             ` Linus Torvalds
2011-03-03 22:26               ` OGAWA Hirofumi
2011-03-03 22:37                 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-03-03 23:14                   ` OGAWA Hirofumi
2011-03-03 23:12                 ` Al Viro
2011-03-03 22:57               ` Al Viro
2011-03-03 23:07                 ` Al Viro
2011-03-04  6:55                 ` omfs fixes Al Viro
2011-03-04 15:24                   ` Bob Copeland
2011-03-03 21:23       ` [RFC] st_nlink after rmdir() and rename() Al Viro
2011-03-03 14:34 ` Theodore Tso
2011-03-03 16:17   ` Andreas Schwab
2011-03-03 19:16   ` Al Viro

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=20110303032454.GI22723@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
    --to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --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).