From: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com>
To: Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@gmail.com>
Cc: jlayton@kernel.org, ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org,
mchangir@redhat.com, lhenriques@suse.de, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] ceph: switch to vfs_inode_has_locks() to fix file lock bug
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2022 14:45:30 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d0035a08-b2db-7bd5-4a19-2427404e3cf4@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOi1vP9Je-DnqUdYcBi_zSDUgj30aYrTeGq1MSwS66E7ptaTSg@mail.gmail.com>
On 15/12/2022 21:20, Ilya Dryomov wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 4:35 AM <xiubli@redhat.com> wrote:
>> From: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com>
>>
>> For the POSIX locks they are using the same owner, which is the
>> thread id. And multiple POSIX locks could be merged into single one,
>> so when checking whether the 'file' has locks may fail.
>>
>> For a file where some openers use locking and others don't is a
>> really odd usage pattern though. Locks are like stoplights -- they
>> only work if everyone pays attention to them.
>>
>> Just switch ceph_get_caps() to check whether any locks are set on
>> the inode. If there are POSIX/OFD/FLOCK locks on the file at the
>> time, we should set CHECK_FILELOCK, regardless of what fd was used
>> to set the lock.
>>
>> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
>> Cc: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
>> Fixes: ff5d913dfc71 ("ceph: return -EIO if read/write against filp that lost file locks")
>> Reviewed-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Xiubo Li <xiubli@redhat.com>
>> ---
>> fs/ceph/caps.c | 2 +-
>> fs/ceph/locks.c | 4 ----
>> fs/ceph/super.h | 1 -
>> 3 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/ceph/caps.c b/fs/ceph/caps.c
>> index 065e9311b607..948136f81fc8 100644
>> --- a/fs/ceph/caps.c
>> +++ b/fs/ceph/caps.c
>> @@ -2964,7 +2964,7 @@ int ceph_get_caps(struct file *filp, int need, int want, loff_t endoff, int *got
>>
>> while (true) {
>> flags &= CEPH_FILE_MODE_MASK;
>> - if (atomic_read(&fi->num_locks))
>> + if (vfs_inode_has_locks(inode))
>> flags |= CHECK_FILELOCK;
>> _got = 0;
>> ret = try_get_cap_refs(inode, need, want, endoff,
>> diff --git a/fs/ceph/locks.c b/fs/ceph/locks.c
>> index 3e2843e86e27..b191426bf880 100644
>> --- a/fs/ceph/locks.c
>> +++ b/fs/ceph/locks.c
>> @@ -32,18 +32,14 @@ void __init ceph_flock_init(void)
>>
>> static void ceph_fl_copy_lock(struct file_lock *dst, struct file_lock *src)
>> {
>> - struct ceph_file_info *fi = dst->fl_file->private_data;
>> struct inode *inode = file_inode(dst->fl_file);
>> atomic_inc(&ceph_inode(inode)->i_filelock_ref);
>> - atomic_inc(&fi->num_locks);
>> }
>>
>> static void ceph_fl_release_lock(struct file_lock *fl)
>> {
>> - struct ceph_file_info *fi = fl->fl_file->private_data;
>> struct inode *inode = file_inode(fl->fl_file);
>> struct ceph_inode_info *ci = ceph_inode(inode);
>> - atomic_dec(&fi->num_locks);
>> if (atomic_dec_and_test(&ci->i_filelock_ref)) {
>> /* clear error when all locks are released */
>> spin_lock(&ci->i_ceph_lock);
>> diff --git a/fs/ceph/super.h b/fs/ceph/super.h
>> index 14454f464029..e7662ff6f149 100644
>> --- a/fs/ceph/super.h
>> +++ b/fs/ceph/super.h
>> @@ -804,7 +804,6 @@ struct ceph_file_info {
>> struct list_head rw_contexts;
>>
>> u32 filp_gen;
>> - atomic_t num_locks;
>> };
>>
>> struct ceph_dir_file_info {
>> --
>> 2.31.1
>>
> Hi Xiubo,
>
> You marked this for stable but there is an obvious dependency on
> vfs_inode_has_locks() that just got merged for 6.2-rc1. Are you
> intending to take it into stable kernels as well?
In the testing branch I just removed the stable list and will do the
backport myself.
Thanks
- Xiubo
> Thanks,
>
> Ilya
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-12-16 6:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-12-14 3:35 [PATCH v5 0/2] ceph: fix the use-after-free bug for file_lock xiubli
2022-12-14 3:35 ` [PATCH v5 1/2] ceph: switch to vfs_inode_has_locks() to fix file lock bug xiubli
2022-12-15 13:20 ` Ilya Dryomov
2022-12-16 0:23 ` Xiubo Li
2022-12-16 6:45 ` Xiubo Li [this message]
2022-12-14 3:35 ` [PATCH v5 2/2] ceph: add ceph specific member support for file_lock xiubli
2023-01-02 11:50 ` [PATCH v5 0/2] ceph: fix the use-after-free bug " Ilya Dryomov
2023-01-03 0:35 ` Xiubo Li
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=d0035a08-b2db-7bd5-4a19-2427404e3cf4@redhat.com \
--to=xiubli@redhat.com \
--cc=ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=idryomov@gmail.com \
--cc=jlayton@kernel.org \
--cc=lhenriques@suse.de \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mchangir@redhat.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--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).