The Linux Kernel Mailing List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>
To: Bruce Allan <bwa@us.ibm.com>
Cc: matthew@wil.cx, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [resend] VFS locking errors on max offset edge cases
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 03:26:10 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20041224032610.GB11543@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1103842880.4702.87.camel@w-bwa3.beaverton.ibm.com>

On Thu, Dec 23, 2004 at 03:01:20PM -0800, Bruce Allan wrote:
> A number of Connectathon (http://www.connectathon.org/nfstests.html)
> POSIX/fcntl() locking tests fail (even on local filesystems) at various
> edge cases (i.e. around maximum allowable offsets) on 64-bit
> architectures.

OK, that's bad and needs to be fixed.

> The overflow tests in fs/compat.c were superfluous where they were
> located because if there was a conflicting lock, l_start and l_len would
> have been overwritten with the values owned by the conflicting lock; if
> no conflicting lock, sys_fcntl() would have returned any applicable
> error.  The tests are moved above the call to sys_fcntl() to capture
> overflow errors which would not have been caught by sys_fcntl(), eg.
> obvious overflow when _FILE_OFFSET_BITS == 32.

I don't buy this explanation though.  With your patch, we're testing
the lock the user passed in to see if it'd overflow.  Clearly, that
can never happen.  The checks are supposed to be testing whether the
conflicting lock is outside the limits that a program using a 32-bit
off_t can cope with.

> These tests also had a couple 'off by one' errors when comparing with
> the maximum allowable offset.

Perhaps just fix that, and don't move the tests around?

> @@ -537,17 +537,19 @@ asmlinkage long compat_sys_fcntl64(unsig
>  		ret = get_compat_flock(&f, compat_ptr(arg));
>  		if (ret != 0)
>  			break;
> +		if ((cmd == F_GETLK) &&
> +		    ((f.l_start > COMPAT_OFF_T_MAX) ||
> +		     ((f.l_start + f.l_len - 1) > COMPAT_OFF_T_MAX))) {
> +				ret = -EOVERFLOW;
> +				break;
> +			}
> +		}
>  		old_fs = get_fs();
>  		set_fs(KERNEL_DS);
>  		ret = sys_fcntl(fd, cmd, (unsigned long)&f);
>  		set_fs(old_fs);
> -		if (cmd == F_GETLK && ret == 0) {
> -			if ((f.l_start >= COMPAT_OFF_T_MAX) ||
> -			    ((f.l_start + f.l_len) > COMPAT_OFF_T_MAX))
> -				ret = -EOVERFLOW;
> -			if (ret == 0)
> -				ret = put_compat_flock(&f, compat_ptr(arg));
> -		}
> +		if (cmd == F_GETLK && ret == 0)
> +			ret = put_compat_flock(&f, compat_ptr(arg));
>  		break;
>  
>  	case F_GETLK64:
> @@ -556,19 +558,21 @@ asmlinkage long compat_sys_fcntl64(unsig
>  		ret = get_compat_flock64(&f, compat_ptr(arg));
>  		if (ret != 0)
>  			break;
> +		if ((cmd == F_GETLK64) &&
> +		    ((f.l_start > COMPAT_LOFF_T_MAX) ||
> +		     ((f.l_start + f.l_len - 1) > COMPAT_LOFF_T_MAX))) {
> +				ret = -EOVERFLOW;
> +				break;
> +			}
> +		}
>  		old_fs = get_fs();
>  		set_fs(KERNEL_DS);
>  		ret = sys_fcntl(fd, (cmd == F_GETLK64) ? F_GETLK :
>  				((cmd == F_SETLK64) ? F_SETLK : F_SETLKW),
>  				(unsigned long)&f);
>  		set_fs(old_fs);
> -		if (cmd == F_GETLK64 && ret == 0) {
> -			if ((f.l_start >= COMPAT_LOFF_T_MAX) ||
> -			    ((f.l_start + f.l_len) > COMPAT_LOFF_T_MAX))
> -				ret = -EOVERFLOW;
> -			if (ret == 0)
> -				ret = put_compat_flock64(&f, compat_ptr(arg));
> -		}
> +		if (cmd == F_GETLK64 && ret == 0)
> +			ret = put_compat_flock64(&f, compat_ptr(arg));
>  		break;
>  
>  	default:
> diff -Nurp -X dontdiff linux-2.6.10-rc3-vanilla/fs/locks.c linux-2.6.10-rc3/fs/locks.c
> --- linux-2.6.10-rc3-vanilla/fs/locks.c	2004-12-23 11:52:50.902423742 -0800
> +++ linux-2.6.10-rc3/fs/locks.c	2004-12-23 12:02:35.268404863 -0800
> @@ -314,7 +314,8 @@ static int flock_to_posix_lock(struct fi
>  
>  	/* POSIX-1996 leaves the case l->l_len < 0 undefined;
>  	   POSIX-2001 defines it. */
> -	start += l->l_start;
> +	if ((start += l->l_start) < 0)
> +		return -EINVAL;

I hate assignments inside if statements.  Make this:

	start += l->l_start;
	if (start < 0)
		return -EINVAL;

-- 
"Next the statesmen will invent cheap lies, putting the blame upon 
the nation that is attacked, and every man will be glad of those
conscience-soothing falsities, and will diligently study them, and refuse
to examine any refutations of them; and thus he will by and by convince 
himself that the war is just, and will thank God for the better sleep 
he enjoys after this process of grotesque self-deception." -- Mark Twain

  parent reply	other threads:[~2004-12-24  3:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-12-23 23:01 [PATCH] [resend] VFS locking errors on max offset edge cases Bruce Allan
2004-12-24  1:08 ` Frank Denis (Jedi/Sector One)
2004-12-24  3:26 ` Matthew Wilcox [this message]
2004-12-30 21:38   ` Bruce Allan
2005-02-18 23:27   ` Bruce Allan

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=20041224032610.GB11543@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk \
    --to=matthew@wil.cx \
    --cc=bwa@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.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