From: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com>
To: Ian Kent <ikent@redhat.com>, Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>,
Trond Myklebust <trondmy@primarydata.com>,
"viro\@zeniv.linux.org.uk" <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: "linux-kernel\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"mkoutny\@suse.com" <mkoutny@suse.com>,
"linux-nfs\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-fsdevel\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: Do we really need d_weak_revalidate???
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2017 11:06:54 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87r2w3jdn5.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <733c15c2-ffbb-9a89-90ec-3ba1d574590e@redhat.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4148 bytes --]
On Mon, Aug 21 2017, Ian Kent wrote:
>>
>> A mount isn't triggered by kern_path(pathname, 0, &path).
>> That '0' would need to include one of
>> LOOKUP_PARENT | LOOKUP_DIRECTORY |
>> LOOKUP_OPEN | LOOKUP_CREATE | LOOKUP_AUTOMOUNT
>>
>> to trigger an automount (otherwise you just get -EISDIR).
>
> It's perfectly sensible to think that but there is a case where a
> a mount is triggered when using kern_path().
>
> The EISDIR return occurs for positive dentrys, negative dentrys
> will still trigger an automount (which is autofs specific,
> indirect mount map using nobrowse option, the install default).
Ok, I understand this better now. This difference between direct and
indirect mounts is slightly awkward. It is visible from user-space, but
not elegant to document.
When you use O_PATH to open a direct automount that has not already been
triggered, the open returns the underlying directory (and fstatfs
confirms that it is AUTOFS_SUPER_MAGIC). When you use O_PATH on
an indirect automount, it *will* trigger the automount when "nobrowse" is
in effect, but it won't when "browse" is in effect.
So we cannot just say "O_PATH doesn't trigger automounts", which is
essentially what I said in
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/docs/man-pages/man-pages.git/commit/?id=97a45d02e6671482e8b2cdcce3951930bf6bdb94
It might be possible to modify automount so that it was more consistent
- i.e. if the point is triggered by a mkdir has been done, just to the
mkdir. If it is triggered after a mkdir has been done, do the mount. I
guess that might be racy, and in any case is hard to justify.
Maybe I should change it to be about "direct automounts", and add a note
that indirect automounts aren't so predictable.
But back to my original issue of wanting to discard
kern_path_mountpoint, what would you think of the following approach -
slight revised from before.
Thanks,
NeilBrown
diff --git a/fs/autofs4/autofs_i.h b/fs/autofs4/autofs_i.h
index beef981aa54f..7663ea82e68d 100644
--- a/fs/autofs4/autofs_i.h
+++ b/fs/autofs4/autofs_i.h
@@ -135,10 +135,13 @@ static inline struct autofs_info *autofs4_dentry_ino(struct dentry *dentry)
/* autofs4_oz_mode(): do we see the man behind the curtain? (The
* processes which do manipulations for us in user space sees the raw
* filesystem without "magic".)
+ * A process performing certain ioctls can get temporary oz status.
*/
+extern struct task_struct *autofs_tmp_oz;
static inline int autofs4_oz_mode(struct autofs_sb_info *sbi)
{
- return sbi->catatonic || task_pgrp(current) == sbi->oz_pgrp;
+ return sbi->catatonic || task_pgrp(current) == sbi->oz_pgrp ||
+ autofs_tmp_oz == current;
}
struct inode *autofs4_get_inode(struct super_block *, umode_t);
diff --git a/fs/autofs4/dev-ioctl.c b/fs/autofs4/dev-ioctl.c
index dd9f1bebb5a3..d76401669a20 100644
--- a/fs/autofs4/dev-ioctl.c
+++ b/fs/autofs4/dev-ioctl.c
@@ -200,6 +200,20 @@ static int autofs_dev_ioctl_protosubver(struct file *fp,
return 0;
}
+struct task_struct *autofs_tmp_oz;
+int kern_path_oz(const char *pathname, int flags, struct path *path)
+{
+ static DEFINE_MUTEX(autofs_oz);
+ int err;
+
+ mutex_lock(&autofs_oz);
+ autofs_tmp_oz = current;
+ err = kern_path(pathname, flags, path);
+ autofs_tmp_oz = NULL;
+ mutex_unlock(&autofs_oz);
+ return err;
+}
+
/* Find the topmost mount satisfying test() */
static int find_autofs_mount(const char *pathname,
struct path *res,
@@ -209,7 +223,8 @@ static int find_autofs_mount(const char *pathname,
struct path path;
int err;
- err = kern_path_mountpoint(AT_FDCWD, pathname, &path, 0);
+ err = kern_path_oz(pathname, 0, &path);
+
if (err)
return err;
err = -ENOENT;
@@ -552,8 +567,7 @@ static int autofs_dev_ioctl_ismountpoint(struct file *fp,
if (!fp || param->ioctlfd == -1) {
if (autofs_type_any(type))
- err = kern_path_mountpoint(AT_FDCWD,
- name, &path, LOOKUP_FOLLOW);
+ err = kern_path_oz(name, LOOKUP_FOLLOW, &path);
else
err = find_autofs_mount(name, &path,
test_by_type, &type);
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 832 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-08-23 1:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-08-11 4:31 Do we really need d_weak_revalidate??? NeilBrown
2017-08-11 5:55 ` Trond Myklebust
2017-08-11 11:01 ` Jeff Layton
2017-08-13 23:36 ` NeilBrown
2017-08-14 10:10 ` Jeff Layton
2017-08-16 2:43 ` NeilBrown
2017-08-16 11:34 ` Jeff Layton
2017-08-16 23:47 ` NeilBrown
2017-08-17 2:20 ` Ian Kent
2017-08-18 5:24 ` NeilBrown
2017-08-18 6:47 ` Ian Kent
2017-08-18 6:55 ` Ian Kent
2017-08-21 6:23 ` NeilBrown
2017-08-21 6:32 ` Ian Kent
2017-08-21 7:46 ` NeilBrown
2017-08-23 1:06 ` NeilBrown [this message]
2017-08-23 2:32 ` Ian Kent
2017-08-23 2:40 ` Ian Kent
2017-08-23 2:54 ` Ian Kent
2017-08-23 7:51 ` Ian Kent
2017-08-24 3:21 ` NeilBrown
2017-08-24 4:35 ` Ian Kent
2017-08-24 4:07 ` NeilBrown
2017-08-24 4:47 ` Ian Kent
2017-08-24 4:58 ` Ian Kent
2017-08-24 11:03 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2017-08-25 0:05 ` Ian Kent
2017-08-25 5:32 ` [PATCH manpages] stat.2: correct AT_NO_AUTOMOUNT text and general revisions NeilBrown
2017-09-14 13:38 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2017-09-14 22:25 ` NeilBrown
2017-09-16 13:11 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2017-09-08 15:15 ` Do we really need d_weak_revalidate??? David Howells
2017-08-13 23:29 ` NeilBrown
2017-08-24 6:34 ` NeilBrown
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=87r2w3jdn5.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name \
--to=neilb@suse.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=ikent@redhat.com \
--cc=jlayton@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mkoutny@suse.com \
--cc=trondmy@primarydata.com \
--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).