From: <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: neilb@suse.com, axboe@fb.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>, <stable-commits@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Patch "block_dev: don't test bdev->bd_contains when it is not stable" has been added to the 4.9-stable tree
Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2017 11:07:36 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <14835244565866@kroah.com> (raw)
This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled
block_dev: don't test bdev->bd_contains when it is not stable
to the 4.9-stable tree which can be found at:
http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git;a=summary
The filename of the patch is:
block_dev-don-t-test-bdev-bd_contains-when-it-is-not-stable.patch
and it can be found in the queue-4.9 subdirectory.
If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable tree,
please let <stable@vger.kernel.org> know about it.
>From bcc7f5b4bee8e327689a4d994022765855c807ff Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2016 08:21:51 -0700
Subject: block_dev: don't test bdev->bd_contains when it is not stable
From: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com>
commit bcc7f5b4bee8e327689a4d994022765855c807ff upstream.
bdev->bd_contains is not stable before calling __blkdev_get().
When __blkdev_get() is called on a parition with ->bd_openers == 0
it sets
bdev->bd_contains = bdev;
which is not correct for a partition.
After a call to __blkdev_get() succeeds, ->bd_openers will be > 0
and then ->bd_contains is stable.
When FMODE_EXCL is used, blkdev_get() calls
bd_start_claiming() -> bd_prepare_to_claim() -> bd_may_claim()
This call happens before __blkdev_get() is called, so ->bd_contains
is not stable. So bd_may_claim() cannot safely use ->bd_contains.
It currently tries to use it, and this can lead to a BUG_ON().
This happens when a whole device is already open with a bd_holder (in
use by dm in my particular example) and two threads race to open a
partition of that device for the first time, one opening with O_EXCL and
one without.
The thread that doesn't use O_EXCL gets through blkdev_get() to
__blkdev_get(), gains the ->bd_mutex, and sets bdev->bd_contains = bdev;
Immediately thereafter the other thread, using FMODE_EXCL, calls
bd_start_claiming() from blkdev_get(). This should fail because the
whole device has a holder, but because bdev->bd_contains == bdev
bd_may_claim() incorrectly reports success.
This thread continues and blocks on bd_mutex.
The first thread then sets bdev->bd_contains correctly and drops the mutex.
The thread using FMODE_EXCL then continues and when it calls bd_may_claim()
again in:
BUG_ON(!bd_may_claim(bdev, whole, holder));
The BUG_ON fires.
Fix this by removing the dependency on ->bd_contains in
bd_may_claim(). As bd_may_claim() has direct access to the whole
device, it can simply test if the target bdev is the whole device.
Fixes: 6b4517a7913a ("block: implement bd_claiming and claiming block")
Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
---
fs/block_dev.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
--- a/fs/block_dev.c
+++ b/fs/block_dev.c
@@ -832,7 +832,7 @@ static bool bd_may_claim(struct block_de
return true; /* already a holder */
else if (bdev->bd_holder != NULL)
return false; /* held by someone else */
- else if (bdev->bd_contains == bdev)
+ else if (whole == bdev)
return true; /* is a whole device which isn't held */
else if (whole->bd_holder == bd_may_claim)
Patches currently in stable-queue which might be from neilb@suse.com are
queue-4.9/block_dev-don-t-test-bdev-bd_contains-when-it-is-not-stable.patch
reply other threads:[~2017-01-04 10:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
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=14835244565866@kroah.com \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=axboe@fb.com \
--cc=neilb@suse.com \
--cc=stable-commits@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).