From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 811F3C433FE for ; Tue, 15 Feb 2022 13:37:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S238363AbiBONhy (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Feb 2022 08:37:54 -0500 Received: from mxb-00190b01.gslb.pphosted.com ([23.128.96.19]:34362 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S234825AbiBONhw (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Feb 2022 08:37:52 -0500 Received: from zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk (zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk [IPv6:2607:5300:60:148a::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CBFE06E8DE; Tue, 15 Feb 2022 05:37:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from viro by zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk with local (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1nJy1U-001zgX-Bx; Tue, 15 Feb 2022 13:37:40 +0000 Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2022 13:37:40 +0000 From: Al Viro To: Miklos Szeredi Cc: Xavier Roche , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, "Aneesh Kumar K.V" Subject: Re: race between vfs_rename and do_linkat (mv and link) Message-ID: References: <20220214210708.GA2167841@xavier-xps> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: Al Viro Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 10:56:29AM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > Doing "lock_rename() + lookup last components" would fix this race. No go - thanks to the possibility of AT_SYMLINK_FOLLOW there. Think of it - we'd need to * lock parents (both at the same time) * look up the last component of source * if it turns a symlink - unlock parents and repeat the entire thing for its body, except when asked not to. * when we are done with the source, look the last component of target up ... and then there is sodding -ESTALE handling, with all the elegance that brings in. > If this was only done on retry, then that would prevent possible > performance regressions, at the cost of extra complexity. Extra compared to the above, that is. How delightful...