linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH v2 05/18] xfs: Add xfs_break_layouts() to the inode eviction path

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: <633739872f981_795a629425@dwillia2-xfh.jf.intel.com.notmuch>
Date:   Fri, 30 Sep 2022 11:46:31 -0700
From:   Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
CC:     Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
        <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>,
        <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>, <nvdimm@...ts.linux.dev>,
        <linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 05/18] xfs: Add xfs_break_layouts() to the inode
 eviction path

Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 10:56:27AM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> > Jan Kara wrote:
> > [..]
> > > I agree this is doable but there's the nasty sideeffect that inode reclaim
> > > may block for abitrary time waiting for page pinning. If the application
> > > that has pinned the page requires __GFP_FS memory allocation to get to a
> > > point where it releases the page, we even have a deadlock possibility.
> > > So it's better than the UAF issue but still not ideal.
> > 
> > I expect VMA pinning would have similar deadlock exposure if pinning a
> > VMA keeps the inode allocated. Anything that puts a page-pin release
> > dependency in the inode freeing path can potentially deadlock a reclaim
> > event that depends on that inode being freed.
> 
> I think the desire would be to go from the VMA to an inode_get and
> hold the inode reference for the from the pin_user_pages() to the
> unpin_user_page(), ie prevent it from being freed in the first place.
> 
> It is a fine idea, the trouble is just the high complexity to get
> there.
> 
> However, I wonder if the trucate/hole punch paths have the same
> deadlock problem?

If the deadlock is waiting for inode reclaim to complete then I can see
why the VMA pin proposal and the current truncate paths do not trigger
that deadlock because the inode is kept out of the reclaim path.

> I agree with you though, given the limited options we should convert
> the UAF into an unlikely deadlock.

I think this approach makes the implementation incrementally better, and
that the need to plumb VMA pinning can await evidence that a driver
actually does this *and* the driver can not be fixed.