From: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
To: stable@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 7.2.y 2/3] super: take lock after last reference count
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2026 09:52:29 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260929135230.3522081-2-sashal@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260929135230.3522081-1-sashal@kernel.org>
From: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
[ Upstream commit 9c486f28994fdfc1a83f5f60129402cf4379957b ]
__put_super() required the caller to hold sb_lock, so put_super()
wrapped it. The per-device superblock table introduced later drops its
passive references from contexts that do not hold sb_lock, so make
put_super() self-locking: drop the count first and take sb_lock only for
the final list_del.
With the count now dropped outside sb_lock a superblock can briefly sit
on @super_blocks with s_passive == 0 before it is unlinked, so the list
walkers (__iterate_supers(), iterate_supers_type(), user_get_super())
switch to refcount_inc_not_zero() and skip it.
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260616-work-super-bdev_holder_global-v2-3-7df6b864028e@kernel.org
Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Signed-off-by: Christian Brauner (Amutable) <brauner@kernel.org>
Stable-dep-of: 2d2a2d7aa987 ("super: make iterate_supers_type() deletion-safe")
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
---
fs/super.c | 63 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------------
1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/super.c b/fs/super.c
index dae21bf03e1cd..2399bb3a17527 100644
--- a/fs/super.c
+++ b/fs/super.c
@@ -404,12 +404,17 @@ static struct super_block *alloc_super(struct file_system_type *type, int flags,
/* Superblock refcounting */
/*
- * Drop a superblock's refcount. The caller must hold sb_lock.
+ * Drop a superblock's passive reference. Must be called WITHOUT sb_lock held;
+ * put_super() acquires sb_lock itself when the final reference is dropped.
*/
-static void __put_super(struct super_block *s)
+void put_super(struct super_block *s)
{
if (refcount_dec_and_test(&s->s_passive)) {
+
+ spin_lock(&sb_lock);
list_del_init(&s->s_list);
+ spin_unlock(&sb_lock);
+
WARN_ON(s->s_dentry_lru.node);
WARN_ON(s->s_inode_lru.node);
WARN_ON(s->s_mounts);
@@ -417,20 +422,6 @@ static void __put_super(struct super_block *s)
}
}
-/**
- * put_super - drop a temporary reference to superblock
- * @sb: superblock in question
- *
- * Drops a temporary reference, frees superblock if there's no
- * references left.
- */
-void put_super(struct super_block *sb)
-{
- spin_lock(&sb_lock);
- __put_super(sb);
- spin_unlock(&sb_lock);
-}
-
static void kill_super_notify(struct super_block *sb)
{
lockdep_assert_not_held(&sb->s_umount);
@@ -479,11 +470,7 @@ void deactivate_locked_super(struct super_block *s)
kill_super_notify(s);
- /*
- * Since list_lru_destroy() may sleep, we cannot call it from
- * put_super(), where we hold the sb_lock. Therefore we destroy
- * the lru lists right now.
- */
+ /* list_lru_destroy() may sleep; put_super() callers may not. */
list_lru_destroy(&s->s_dentry_lru);
list_lru_destroy(&s->s_inode_lru);
@@ -852,14 +839,17 @@ static void __iterate_supers(void (*f)(struct super_block *, void *), void *arg,
struct super_block *sb, *p = NULL;
bool excl = flags & SUPER_ITER_EXCL;
- guard(spinlock)(&sb_lock);
+ spin_lock(&sb_lock);
for (sb = first_super(flags);
!list_entry_is_head(sb, &super_blocks, s_list);
sb = next_super(sb, flags)) {
if (super_flags(sb, SB_DYING))
continue;
- refcount_inc(&sb->s_passive);
+
+ if (!refcount_inc_not_zero(&sb->s_passive))
+ continue;
+
spin_unlock(&sb_lock);
if (flags & SUPER_ITER_UNLOCKED) {
@@ -869,13 +859,14 @@ static void __iterate_supers(void (*f)(struct super_block *, void *), void *arg,
super_unlock(sb, excl);
}
- spin_lock(&sb_lock);
if (p)
- __put_super(p);
+ put_super(p);
p = sb;
+ spin_lock(&sb_lock);
}
+ spin_unlock(&sb_lock);
if (p)
- __put_super(p);
+ put_super(p);
}
void iterate_supers(void (*f)(struct super_block *, void *), void *arg)
@@ -904,7 +895,9 @@ void iterate_supers_type(struct file_system_type *type,
if (super_flags(sb, SB_DYING))
continue;
- refcount_inc(&sb->s_passive);
+ if (!refcount_inc_not_zero(&sb->s_passive))
+ continue;
+
spin_unlock(&sb_lock);
locked = super_lock_shared(sb);
@@ -913,14 +906,14 @@ void iterate_supers_type(struct file_system_type *type,
super_unlock_shared(sb);
}
- spin_lock(&sb_lock);
if (p)
- __put_super(p);
+ put_super(p);
p = sb;
+ spin_lock(&sb_lock);
}
- if (p)
- __put_super(p);
spin_unlock(&sb_lock);
+ if (p)
+ put_super(p);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(iterate_supers_type);
@@ -936,15 +929,17 @@ struct super_block *user_get_super(dev_t dev, bool excl)
if (sb->s_dev != dev)
continue;
- refcount_inc(&sb->s_passive);
+ if (!refcount_inc_not_zero(&sb->s_passive))
+ continue;
+
spin_unlock(&sb_lock);
locked = super_lock(sb, excl);
if (locked)
return sb;
+ put_super(sb);
spin_lock(&sb_lock);
- __put_super(sb);
break;
}
spin_unlock(&sb_lock);
@@ -1375,9 +1370,7 @@ static struct super_block *bdev_super_lock(struct block_device *bdev, bool excl)
lockdep_assert_not_held(&bdev->bd_disk->open_mutex);
/* Make sure sb doesn't go away from under us */
- spin_lock(&sb_lock);
refcount_inc(&sb->s_passive);
- spin_unlock(&sb_lock);
mutex_unlock(&bdev->bd_holder_lock);
--
2.53.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-29 13:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-29 6:45 FAILED: patch "[PATCH] super: make iterate_supers_type() deletion-safe" failed to apply to 7.2-stable tree gregkh
2026-09-29 13:52 ` [PATCH 7.2.y 1/3] super: convert s_count to refcount_t s_passive Sasha Levin
2026-09-29 13:52 ` Sasha Levin [this message]
2026-09-29 13:52 ` [PATCH 7.2.y 3/3] super: make iterate_supers_type() deletion-safe Sasha Levin
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=20260929135230.3522081-2-sashal@kernel.org \
--to=sashal@kernel.org \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--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