linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
To: Filipe Brandenburger <filbranden@gmail.com>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] locks: prevent side-effects of locks_release_private before file_lock is initialized
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2012 16:01:31 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120618200131.GA12351@fieldses.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1339815965-1171-2-git-send-email-filbranden@gmail.com>

On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 11:06:05PM -0400, Filipe Brandenburger wrote:
> When calling fcntl(F_SETLEASE) for a second time on the same fd, do_fcntl_add_lease
> will allocate and initialize a new file_lock, then if __vfs_setlease decides to
> reuse the existing file_lock it will free the newly allocated one to prevent leaking
> memory.
> 
> However, the new file_lock was initialized to the point where it has a valid file
> descriptor pointer and lmops, so calling locks_free_lock will trigger a call to
> lease_release_private_callback which will have the side effect of clearing the
> fcntl(F_SETOWN) and fcntl(F_SETSIG) settings for the file descriptor even though
> that was not supposed to happen at that point.
> 
> This patch will fix this by calling kmem_cache_free(filelock_cache, fl) instead of
> locks_free_lock(fl) if the file_lock is not completely initialized and actually
> associated to the file descriptor, avoiding the call to lease_release_private_callback
> with the undesired side effects.

Thanks for catching this!

The result doesn't feel entirely obvious to me.  We could consolidate
the two kmem_cache_free calls and add a comment saying why we're not
calling locks_free_lock().

But clearest might be to separate allocation and initialization and
delay the latter till we know we're going to need it?

--b.

> 
> Signed-off-by: Filipe Brandenburger <filbranden@gmail.com>
> ---
>  fs/locks.c |    8 ++++----
>  1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/locks.c b/fs/locks.c
> index 814c51d..ce57c59 100644
> --- a/fs/locks.c
> +++ b/fs/locks.c
> @@ -473,7 +473,7 @@ static struct file_lock *lease_alloc(struct file *filp, int type)
>  
>  	error = lease_init(filp, type, fl);
>  	if (error) {
> -		locks_free_lock(fl);
> +		kmem_cache_free(filelock_cache, fl);
>  		return ERR_PTR(error);
>  	}
>  	return fl;
> @@ -1538,7 +1538,7 @@ static int do_fcntl_add_lease(unsigned int fd, struct file *filp, long arg)
>  
>  	new = fasync_alloc();
>  	if (!new) {
> -		locks_free_lock(fl);
> +		kmem_cache_free(filelock_cache, fl);
>  		return -ENOMEM;
>  	}
>  	ret = fl;
> @@ -1546,11 +1546,11 @@ static int do_fcntl_add_lease(unsigned int fd, struct file *filp, long arg)
>  	error = __vfs_setlease(filp, arg, &ret);
>  	if (error) {
>  		unlock_flocks();
> -		locks_free_lock(fl);
> +		kmem_cache_free(filelock_cache, fl);
>  		goto out_free_fasync;
>  	}
>  	if (ret != fl)
> -		locks_free_lock(fl);
> +		kmem_cache_free(filelock_cache, fl);
>  
>  	/*
>  	 * fasync_insert_entry() returns the old entry if any.
> -- 
> 1.7.7.6
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2012-06-18 20:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-06-16  3:06 [PATCH 0/1] locks: prevent side-effects of locks_release_private before file_lock is initialized Filipe Brandenburger
2012-06-16  3:06 ` [PATCH 1/1] " Filipe Brandenburger
2012-06-18 20:01   ` J. Bruce Fields [this message]
2012-06-20  2:39     ` Filipe Brandenburger
2012-06-26  0:29       ` J. Bruce Fields
2012-06-26  0:48         ` Filipe Brandenburger
2012-06-26  2:10           ` Filipe Brandenburger
2012-06-26 15:23             ` J. Bruce Fields
2012-06-27  1:50 ` [PATCH v2 " Filipe Brandenburger
2012-07-05 22:42   ` J. Bruce Fields
2012-07-07 19:04     ` J. Bruce Fields
2012-07-27  4:42       ` [PATCHv3] " Filipe Brandenburger
2012-07-27 20:45         ` J. Bruce Fields
2012-07-29 15:56           ` J. Bruce Fields

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=20120618200131.GA12351@fieldses.org \
    --to=bfields@fieldses.org \
    --cc=filbranden@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=matthew@wil.cx \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    /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).