linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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


             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).