public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@linux.microsoft.com>
To: Dominique Martinet <asmadeus@codewreck.org>
Cc: Eric Van Hensbergen <ericvh@gmail.com>,
	Latchesar Ionkov <lucho@ionkov.net>,
	Christian Schoenebeck <linux_oss@crudebyte.com>,
	Jianyong Wu <jianyong.wu@arm.com>,
	v9fs-developer@lists.sourceforge.net,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] 9p: Fix refcounting during full path walks for fid lookups
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2022 14:38:07 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220613193807.GF7401@sequoia> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YqUifCFPTG8Qmn7a@codewreck.org>

On 2022-06-12 08:17:16, Dominique Martinet wrote:
> Tyler Hicks wrote on Thu, May 26, 2022 at 06:59:59PM -0500:
> > Decrement the refcount of the parent dentry's fid after walking
> > each path component during a full path walk for a lookup. Failure to do
> > so can lead to fids that are not clunked until the filesystem is
> > unmounted, as indicated by this warning:
> > 
> >  9pnet: found fid 3 not clunked
> > 
> > The improper refcounting after walking resulted in open(2) returning
> > -EIO on any directories underneath the mount point when using the virtio
> > transport. When using the fd transport, there's no apparent issue until
> > the filesytem is unmounted and the warning above is emitted to the logs.
> > 
> > In some cases, the user may not yet be attached to the filesystem and a
> > new root fid, associated with the user, is created and attached to the
> > root dentry before the full path walk is performed. Increment the new
> > root fid's refcount to two in that situation so that it can be safely
> > decremented to one after it is used for the walk operation. The new fid
> > will still be attached to the root dentry when
> > v9fs_fid_lookup_with_uid() returns so a final refcount of one is
> > correct/expected.
> > 
> > Fixes: 6636b6dcc3db ("9p: add refcount to p9_fid struct")
> > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> > Signed-off-by: Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@linux.microsoft.com>
> > ---
> >  fs/9p/fid.c | 17 +++++------------
> >  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/fs/9p/fid.c b/fs/9p/fid.c
> > index 79df61fe0e59..5a469b79c1ee 100644
> > --- a/fs/9p/fid.c
> > +++ b/fs/9p/fid.c
> > @@ -152,7 +152,7 @@ static struct p9_fid *v9fs_fid_lookup_with_uid(struct dentry *dentry,
> >  	const unsigned char **wnames, *uname;
> >  	int i, n, l, clone, access;
> >  	struct v9fs_session_info *v9ses;
> > -	struct p9_fid *fid, *old_fid = NULL;
> > +	struct p9_fid *fid, *old_fid;
> >  
> >  	v9ses = v9fs_dentry2v9ses(dentry);
> >  	access = v9ses->flags & V9FS_ACCESS_MASK;
> > @@ -194,13 +194,12 @@ static struct p9_fid *v9fs_fid_lookup_with_uid(struct dentry *dentry,
> >  		if (IS_ERR(fid))
> >  			return fid;
> >  
> > +		refcount_inc(&fid->count);
> >  		v9fs_fid_add(dentry->d_sb->s_root, fid);
> >  	}
> >  	/* If we are root ourself just return that */
> > -	if (dentry->d_sb->s_root == dentry) {
> > -		refcount_inc(&fid->count);
> > +	if (dentry->d_sb->s_root == dentry)
> >  		return fid;
> > -	}
> >  	/*
> >  	 * Do a multipath walk with attached root.
> >  	 * When walking parent we need to make sure we
> > @@ -212,6 +211,7 @@ static struct p9_fid *v9fs_fid_lookup_with_uid(struct dentry *dentry,
> >  		fid = ERR_PTR(n);
> >  		goto err_out;
> >  	}
> > +	old_fid = fid;
> >  	clone = 1;
> >  	i = 0;
> >  	while (i < n) {
> > @@ -221,15 +221,8 @@ static struct p9_fid *v9fs_fid_lookup_with_uid(struct dentry *dentry,
> >  		 * walk to ensure none of the patch component change
> >  		 */
> >  		fid = p9_client_walk(fid, l, &wnames[i], clone);
> > +		p9_client_clunk(old_fid);
> 
> hmm, if we're not cloning then fid == old_fid and the refcount is not
> increased? (I think... I didn't even realize/remember that walk had a
> no-clone mode, sorry.)
> 
> So we'd only need to clunk if old fid here if we're cloning (old fid is
> the initial root fid), but I'm not sure how to test this path as I
> couldn't think of any pattern that'd trigger a multi-level lookup,
> so I'm not 100% sure; I'll try a bit more.

Yes, you're correct. Nice catch!

Tyler

> 
> -- 
> Dominique
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2022-06-13 20:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-05-26 23:59 [PATCH v2 0/5] 9p: Fix refcounting and improve readability in lookup Tyler Hicks
2022-05-26 23:59 ` [PATCH v2 1/5] 9p: Fix refcounting during full path walks for fid lookups Tyler Hicks
2022-05-30 17:14   ` Christian Schoenebeck
2022-05-31 14:28     ` Tyler Hicks
2022-06-01 14:28       ` Christian Schoenebeck
2022-06-07  3:41         ` Tyler Hicks
2022-06-09 12:44           ` Christian Schoenebeck
2022-06-11 12:46             ` Dominique Martinet
2022-06-11 23:17   ` Dominique Martinet
2022-06-13 19:38     ` Tyler Hicks [this message]
2022-05-27  0:00 ` [PATCH v2 2/5] 9p: Track the root fid with its own variable during lookups Tyler Hicks
2022-05-27  0:00 ` [PATCH v2 3/5] 9p: Make the path walk logic more clear about when cloning is required Tyler Hicks
2022-05-27  0:00 ` [PATCH v2 4/5] 9p: Remove unnecessary variable for old fids while walking from d_parent Tyler Hicks
2022-05-27  0:00 ` [PATCH v2 5/5] 9p: Fix minor typo in code comment Tyler Hicks

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=20220613193807.GF7401@sequoia \
    --to=tyhicks@linux.microsoft.com \
    --cc=asmadeus@codewreck.org \
    --cc=ericvh@gmail.com \
    --cc=jianyong.wu@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux_oss@crudebyte.com \
    --cc=lucho@ionkov.net \
    --cc=v9fs-developer@lists.sourceforge.net \
    /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