linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
To: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com>, Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] vfs: shave work on failed file open
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2023 04:06:15 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231010030615.GO800259@ZenIV> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230930-glitzer-errungenschaft-b86880c177c4@brauner>

On Sat, Sep 30, 2023 at 11:04:20AM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote:
> +On newer kernels rcu based file lookup has been switched to rely on
> +SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU instead of call_rcu(). It isn't sufficient anymore to just
> +acquire a reference to the file in question under rcu using
> +atomic_long_inc_not_zero() since the file might have already been recycled and
> +someone else might have bumped the reference. In other words, the caller might
> +see reference count bumps from newer users. For this is reason it is necessary
> +to verify that the pointer is the same before and after the reference count
> +increment. This pattern can be seen in get_file_rcu() and __files_get_rcu().
> +
> +In addition, it isn't possible to access or check fields in struct file without
> +first aqcuiring a reference on it. Not doing that was always very dodgy and it
> +was only usable for non-pointer data in struct file. With SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU
> +it is necessary that callers first acquire a reference under rcu or they must
> +hold the files_lock of the fdtable. Failing to do either one of this is a bug.

Trivial correction: the last paragraph applies only to rcu lookups - something
like
        spin_lock(&files->file_lock);
        fdt = files_fdtable(files);
        if (close->fd >= fdt->max_fds) {
                spin_unlock(&files->file_lock);
                goto err;  
        }
        file = rcu_dereference_protected(fdt->fd[close->fd],
                        lockdep_is_held(&files->file_lock));
        if (!file || io_is_uring_fops(file)) {
		     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ fetches file->f_op
                spin_unlock(&files->file_lock);
                goto err;
        }
	...

should be still valid.  As written, the reference to "rcu based file lookup"
is buried in the previous paragraph and it's not obvious that it applies to
the last one as well.  Incidentally, I would probably turn that fragment
(in io_uring/openclose.c:io_close()) into
	spin_lock(&files->file_lock);
	file = files_lookup_fd_locked(files, close->fd);
	if (!file || io_is_uring_fops(file)) {
		spin_unlock(&files->file_lock);
		goto err;
	}
	...

> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/spufs/coredump.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/spufs/coredump.c
> index 1a587618015c..5e157f48995e 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/spufs/coredump.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/spufs/coredump.c
> @@ -74,10 +74,13 @@ static struct spu_context *coredump_next_context(int *fd)
>  	*fd = n - 1;
>  
>  	rcu_read_lock();
> -	file = lookup_fd_rcu(*fd);
> -	ctx = SPUFS_I(file_inode(file))->i_ctx;
> -	get_spu_context(ctx);
> +	file = lookup_fdget_rcu(*fd);
>  	rcu_read_unlock();
> +	if (file) {
> +		ctx = SPUFS_I(file_inode(file))->i_ctx;
> +		get_spu_context(ctx);
> +		fput(file);
> +	}

Well...  Here we should have descriptor table unshared, and we really
do rely upon that - we expect the file we'd found to have been a spufs
one *and* to have stayed that way.  So if anyone could change the
descriptor table behind our back, we'd be FUBAR.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2023-10-10  3:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-09-26 16:22 [PATCH v2] vfs: shave work on failed file open Mateusz Guzik
2023-09-26 19:00 ` Linus Torvalds
2023-09-26 19:28   ` Mateusz Guzik
2023-09-27 14:09     ` Christian Brauner
2023-09-27 14:34       ` Mateusz Guzik
2023-09-27 17:48       ` Linus Torvalds
2023-09-27 17:56         ` Mateusz Guzik
2023-09-27 18:05           ` Linus Torvalds
2023-09-27 18:32             ` Mateusz Guzik
2023-09-27 20:27               ` Linus Torvalds
2023-09-27 21:06                 ` Mateusz Guzik
2023-09-27 21:18                   ` Linus Torvalds
2023-09-27 21:30                     ` Mateusz Guzik
2023-09-28 13:25                 ` Christian Brauner
2023-09-28 14:05                   ` Christian Brauner
2023-09-28 14:43                     ` Jann Horn
2023-09-28 17:21                       ` Linus Torvalds
2023-09-29  9:20                         ` Christian Brauner
2023-09-29 13:31                           ` Jann Horn
2023-09-29 19:57                             ` Christian Brauner
2023-09-29 21:23                               ` Mateusz Guzik
2023-09-29 21:39                                 ` Mateusz Guzik
2023-09-29 23:57                                   ` Linus Torvalds
2023-09-30  9:04                                     ` Christian Brauner
2023-10-03 16:45                                       ` Nathan Chancellor
2023-10-10  3:06                                       ` Al Viro [this message]
2023-10-10  8:29                                         ` Christian Brauner
2023-09-29 22:24                                 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-09-29 23:02                                   ` Jann Horn

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=20231010030615.GO800259@ZenIV \
    --to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=brauner@kernel.org \
    --cc=jannh@google.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mjguzik@gmail.com \
    --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).