From: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
To: NeilBrown <neil@brown.name>
Cc: Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>,
Joel Granados <joel.granados@kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] proc_sysctl: Fix up ->is_seen() handling
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2025 03:41:34 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250613024134.GF1647736@ZenIV> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <174978225309.608730.8864073362569294982@noble.neil.brown.name>
On Fri, Jun 13, 2025 at 12:37:33PM +1000, NeilBrown wrote:
> If two threads in the same namespace look up the same name at the same
> time (which previously didn't exist), they will both enter
> d_alloc_parallel() where neither will notice the other, so both will
> create and install d_in_lookup() dentries, and then both will call
> ->lookup, creating two identical inodes.
>
> I suspect that isn't fatal, but it does seem odd.
>
> Maybe proc_sys_compare should return 0 for d_in_lookup() (aka !inode)
> dentries, and then proc_sys_revalidate() can perform the is_seen test
> and return -EAGAIN if needed, and __lookup_slow() and others could
> interpret that as meaning to "goto again" without calling
> d_invalidate().
Umm... Not sure it's the best solution; let me think a bit. Just need
to finish going through the ported rpc_pipefs series for the final look
and posting it; should be about half an hour or so...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-06-13 2:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-06-13 0:37 [PATCH] proc_sysctl: Fix up ->is_seen() handling NeilBrown
2025-06-13 1:54 ` Al Viro
2025-06-13 2:01 ` Al Viro
2025-06-13 2:18 ` NeilBrown
2025-06-13 2:37 ` NeilBrown
2025-06-13 2:41 ` Al Viro [this message]
2025-06-13 3:14 ` Al Viro
2025-06-16 8:37 ` kernel test robot
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=20250613024134.GF1647736@ZenIV \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=joel.granados@kernel.org \
--cc=kees@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=neil@brown.name \
/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