From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk ([195.92.253.2]:33824 "EHLO
	ZenIV.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1753062AbcFCWX6 (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 3 Jun 2016 18:23:58 -0400
Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2016 23:23:55 +0100
From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Oleg Drokin <green@linuxhacker.ru>,
	"<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org> Mailing List"
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"<linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Dcache oops
Message-ID: <20160603222355.GW14480@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
References: <20160603033750.GL14480@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <0C971585-6BFC-4665-832B-9B262F733BFC@linuxhacker.ru>
 <20160603042648.GN14480@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <74306F63-DBDF-4DED-85D2-5C3FB21B8A1E@linuxhacker.ru>
 <20160603182203.GR14480@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <4285E00F-7228-485C-AD32-97552ED746F2@linuxhacker.ru>
 <20160603200759.GS14480@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <CA+55aFznPit97evuwZHdCG55=N0QbkFSST2ydKxvExQTR-YXTg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20160603212652.GT14480@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <CA+55aFyYkbXqoJ3PqfrnxWDEXJM_BH6Q_OdKf+UVJYEUF4gdQA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFyYkbXqoJ3PqfrnxWDEXJM_BH6Q_OdKf+UVJYEUF4gdQA@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org>

On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 03:00:02PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> Is perhaps the "delayed_call" logic broken, and the symlink is free'd too early?
> 
> That whole set_delayed_call/do_delayed_call thing came in 4.5. Maybe
> something broke that logic, and we've executed the delayed freeing
> before we should have.
> 
> Normally it's done at terminate_walk() time. But I note that in
> walk_component(), we do put_link(nd) which does a do_delayed_call(),
> but does *not* do a clear_delayed_call(), so now I think a subsequent
> terminate_walk() might drop it *again*.

Nope - put_link() also decrements nd->depth.  No double calls there...

> I'm probably missing something, but I have to say that the old
> explicit "put_link()" callback logic was more obvious than the new
> delayed calls are.

It's not that.  It's explicit put_link() in do_last(), followed by
ESTALEOPEN and subsequent misbegotten "retry the last step on ESTALEOPEN"
looking at now-freed nd->last.name.  IOW, the bug predates delayed_call
stuff.