linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] vfs: use READ_ONCE() to access ->i

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20190411172844.GA225654@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 11 Apr 2019 10:28:45 -0700
From:   Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>
To:     Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Cc:     linux-fscrypt@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
        linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] vfs: use READ_ONCE() to access ->i_link

On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 03:25:15AM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 04:15:48PM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 10:06:57PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > > On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 01:21:14PM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
> > > > From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...gle.com>
> > > > 
> > > > Use 'READ_ONCE(inode->i_link)' to explicitly support filesystems caching
> > > > the symlink target in ->i_link later if it was unavailable at iget()
> > > > time, or wasn't easily available.  I'll be doing this in fscrypt, to
> > > > improve the performance of encrypted symlinks on ext4, f2fs, and ubifs.
> > > > 
> > > > ->i_link will start NULL and may later be set to a non-NULL value by a
> > > > smp_store_release() or cmpxchg_release().  READ_ONCE() is needed on the
> > > > read side.  smp_load_acquire() is unnecessary because only a data
> > > > dependency barrier is required.  (Thanks to Al for pointing this out.)
> > > 
> > > You've missed vfs_readlink()...
> > 
> > How so?  The patch already updates vfs_readlink().
> 
> Huh?  Right you are - fsck knows how have I managed to misread that...
> Anyway, I can pick that READ_ONCE() patch through vfs.git if you wish,
> or it can go through your tree with my Acked-by - up to you...

Unless you expect merge conflicts, it's easier for me to take it through the
fscrypt tree, since it's a small patch and the second patch technically isn't
correct without it.  I'll add your Acked-by.

Are you planning to review the second patch too?

Thanks!

- Eric