public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@fb.com,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, paulmck@kernel.org,
	gscrivan@redhat.com, Eric Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
	Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] vfs: free vfsmount through rcu work from kern_unmount
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2022 20:24:09 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YhAAaU5wSoFdMsQf@zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Yg/273dWmTKDW5Mu@zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk>

On Fri, Feb 18, 2022 at 07:43:43PM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 18, 2022 at 02:33:31PM -0500, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > On Fri, 2022-02-18 at 19:26 +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> > > On Fri, Feb 18, 2022 at 01:31:13PM -0500, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > > > After kern_unmount returns, callers can no longer access the
> > > > vfsmount structure. However, the vfsmount structure does need
> > > > to be kept around until the end of the RCU grace period, to
> > > > make sure other accesses have all gone away too.
> > > > 
> > > > This can be accomplished by either gating each kern_unmount
> > > > on synchronize_rcu (the comment in the code says it all), or
> > > > by deferring the freeing until the next grace period, where
> > > > it needs to be handled in a workqueue due to the locking in
> > > > mntput_no_expire().
> > > 
> > > NAK.  There's code that relies upon kern_unmount() being
> > > synchronous.  That's precisely the reason why MNT_INTERNAL
> > > is treated that way in mntput_no_expire().
> > 
> > Fair enough. Should I make a kern_unmount_rcu() version
> > that gets called just from mq_put_mnt()?
> 
> Umm...  I'm not sure you can afford having struct ipc_namespace
> freed and reused before the mqueue superblock gets at least to
> deactivate_locked_super().

BTW, that's a good demonstration of the problems with making those
beasts async.  struct mount is *not* accessed past kern_unmount(),
but the objects used by the superblock might very well be - in
this case they (struct ipc_namespace, pointed to by s->s_fs_data)
are freed by the caller after kern_unmount() returns.  And possibly
reused.  Now note that they are used as search keys by
mqueue_get_tree() and it becomes very fishy.

If you want to go that way, make it something like

void put_ipc_ns(struct ipc_namespace *ns)
{
        if (refcount_dec_and_lock(&ns->ns.count, &mq_lock)) {
		mq_clear_sbinfo(ns);
		spin_unlock(&mq_lock);
		kern_unmount_rcu(ns->mq_mnt);
	}
}

and give mqueue this for ->kill_sb():

static void mqueue_kill_super(struct super_block *sb)
{
	struct ipc_namespace *ns = sb->s_fs_info;
	kill_litter_super(sb);
	do the rest of free_ipc_ns();
}

One thing: kern_unmount_rcu() needs a very big warning about
the caution needed from its callers.  It's really not safe
for general use, and it will be a temptation for folks with
scalability problems like this one to just use it instead of
kern_unmount() and declare the problem solved.

  reply	other threads:[~2022-02-18 20:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-02-18 18:31 [PATCH 0/2] fix rate limited ipc_namespace freeing Rik van Riel
2022-02-18 18:31 ` [PATCH 1/2] vfs: free vfsmount through rcu work from kern_unmount Rik van Riel
2022-02-18 19:26   ` Al Viro
2022-02-18 19:33     ` Rik van Riel
2022-02-18 19:43       ` Al Viro
2022-02-18 20:24         ` Al Viro [this message]
2022-02-18 21:06           ` Al Viro
2022-02-19  5:50             ` Al Viro
2022-02-19  5:53   ` Al Viro
2022-02-19  5:58     ` Al Viro
2022-02-19  6:07       ` Al Viro
2022-02-18 18:31 ` [PATCH 2/2] ipc: get rid of free_ipc_work workqueue Rik van Riel

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=YhAAaU5wSoFdMsQf@zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk \
    --to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=clm@fb.com \
    --cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=gscrivan@redhat.com \
    --cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=riel@surriel.com \
    /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