From: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>
To: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH] fs: add memory barrier in __fget_light()
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2022 18:13:07 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20221031171307.2784981-1-jannh@google.com> (raw)
We must prevent the CPU from reordering the files->count read with the
FD table access like this, on architectures where read-read reordering is
possible:
files_lookup_fd_raw()
close_fd()
put_files_struct()
atomic_read(&files->count)
I would like to mark this for stable, but the stable rules explicitly say
"no theoretical races", and given that the FD table pointer and
files->count are explicitly stored in the same cacheline, this sort of
reordering seems quite unlikely in practice...
If this is too expensive on platforms like arm64, I guess the more
performant alternative would be to add another flags field that tracks
whether the fs_struct was ever shared and check that instead of the
reference count in __fget_light().
Signed-off-by: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>
---
fs/file.c | 12 ++++++++++++
1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
diff --git a/fs/file.c b/fs/file.c
index 5f9c802a5d8d3..6144287ddc0fe 100644
--- a/fs/file.c
+++ b/fs/file.c
@@ -1004,6 +1004,18 @@ static unsigned long __fget_light(unsigned int fd, fmode_t mask)
struct file *file;
if (atomic_read(&files->count) == 1) {
+ /*
+ * If another thread is concurrently calling close_fd() followed
+ * by put_files_struct(), we must not observe the old table
+ * entry combined with the new refcount - otherwise we could
+ * return a file that is concurrently being freed.
+ *
+ * Pairs with atomic_dec_and_test() in put_files_struct().
+ * An alternative to using a barrier here would be to use a
+ * separate field in files_struct to track whether it was ever
+ * shared.
+ */
+ smp_rmb();
file = files_lookup_fd_raw(files, fd);
if (!file || unlikely(file->f_mode & mask))
return 0;
base-commit: 30a0b95b1335e12efef89dd78518ed3e4a71a763
--
2.38.1.273.g43a17bfeac-goog
next reply other threads:[~2022-10-31 17:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-10-31 17:13 Jann Horn [this message]
2022-10-31 17:37 ` [PATCH] fs: add memory barrier in __fget_light() Linus Torvalds
2022-11-01 10:53 ` Mark Rutland
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=20221031171307.2784981-1-jannh@google.com \
--to=jannh@google.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mszeredi@redhat.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=will@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).