From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
To: Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com>
Cc: joe.korty@ccur.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
drepper@redhat.com, mingo@elte.hu
Subject: Re: lock_kernel called under spinlock in NFS
Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 13:43:46 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060602134346.73019624.akpm@osdl.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1149280078.5621.63.camel@lade.trondhjem.org>
Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2006-06-02 at 16:24 -0400, Joe Korty wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 01, 2006 at 04:13:39PM -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2006-06-01 at 15:55 -0400, Joe Korty wrote:
> > >> Tree 5fdccf2354269702f71beb8e0a2942e4167fd992
> > >>
> > >> [PATCH] vfs: *at functions: core
> > >>
> > >> introduced a bug where lock_kernel() can be called from
> > >> under a spinlock. To trigger the bug one must have
> > >> CONFIG_PREEMPT_BKL=y and be using NFS heavily. It is
> > >> somewhat rare and, so far, haven't traced down the userland
> > >> sequence that causes the fatal path to be taken.
> > >>
> > >> The bug was caused by the insertion into do_path_lookup()
> > >> of a call to file_permission(). do_path_lookup()
> > >> read-locks current->fs->lock for most of its operation.
> > >> file_permission() calls permission() which calls
> > >> nfs_permission(), which has one path through it
> > >> that uses lock_kernel().
> >
> > > Nowhere should anyone be calling file_permission() under a spinlock.
> > >
> > > Why would you need to read-protect current->fs in the case where you are
> > > starting from a file? The correct thing to do there would appear to be
> > > to read_protect only the cases where (*name=='/') and (dfd == AT_FDCWD).
> > >
> > > Something like the attached patch...
> >
> >
> > Hi Trond,
> > I've been running with the patch for the last few hours, on an nfs-rooted
> > system, and it has been working fine. Any plans to submit this for 2.6.17?
>
> It probably ought to be, given the nature of the sin. Andrew?
>
OK.
Just to confirm, this is final?
From: Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com>
We're presently running lock_kernel() under fs_lock via nfs's ->permission
handler. That's a ranking bug and sometimes a sleep-in-spinlock bug. This
problem was introduced in the openat() patchset.
We should not need to hold the current->fs->lock for a codepath that doesn't
use current->fs.
Signed-off-by: Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
---
fs/namei.c | 6 ++++--
1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff -puN fs/namei.c~fs-nameic-call-to-file_permission-under-a-spinlock-in-do_lookup_path fs/namei.c
--- 25/fs/namei.c~fs-nameic-call-to-file_permission-under-a-spinlock-in-do_lookup_path Fri Jun 2 13:39:52 2006
+++ 25-akpm/fs/namei.c Fri Jun 2 13:39:52 2006
@@ -1080,8 +1080,8 @@ static int fastcall do_path_lookup(int d
nd->flags = flags;
nd->depth = 0;
- read_lock(¤t->fs->lock);
if (*name=='/') {
+ read_lock(¤t->fs->lock);
if (current->fs->altroot && !(nd->flags & LOOKUP_NOALT)) {
nd->mnt = mntget(current->fs->altrootmnt);
nd->dentry = dget(current->fs->altroot);
@@ -1092,9 +1092,12 @@ static int fastcall do_path_lookup(int d
}
nd->mnt = mntget(current->fs->rootmnt);
nd->dentry = dget(current->fs->root);
+ read_unlock(¤t->fs->lock);
} else if (dfd == AT_FDCWD) {
+ read_lock(¤t->fs->lock);
nd->mnt = mntget(current->fs->pwdmnt);
nd->dentry = dget(current->fs->pwd);
+ read_unlock(¤t->fs->lock);
} else {
struct dentry *dentry;
@@ -1118,7 +1121,6 @@ static int fastcall do_path_lookup(int d
fput_light(file, fput_needed);
}
- read_unlock(¤t->fs->lock);
current->total_link_count = 0;
retval = link_path_walk(name, nd);
out:
_
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-06-02 20:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-06-01 19:55 lock_kernel called under spinlock in NFS Joe Korty
2006-06-01 20:13 ` Trond Myklebust
2006-06-02 20:24 ` Joe Korty
2006-06-02 20:27 ` Trond Myklebust
2006-06-02 20:43 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2006-06-02 21:26 ` Trond Myklebust
2006-06-03 18:30 ` Sergey Vlasov
2006-06-03 22:10 ` Trond Myklebust
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=20060602134346.73019624.akpm@osdl.org \
--to=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com \
--cc=drepper@redhat.com \
--cc=joe.korty@ccur.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
/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