[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0711191852070.14717@blonde.wat.veritas.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 19:04:57 +0000 (GMT)
From: Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>
cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...nel.org,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
Justin Forbes <jmforbes@...uxtx.org>,
Zwane Mwaikambo <zwane@....linux.org.uk>,
"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
Chuck Wolber <chuckw@...ntumlinux.com>,
Chris Wedgwood <reviews@...cw.f00f.org>,
Michael Krufky <mkrufky@...uxtv.org>,
Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@...hat.com>,
Domenico Andreoli <cavokz@...il.com>,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk,
Erez Zadok <ezk@...sunysb.edu>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
Subject: Re: [patch 04/26] writeback: dont propagate AOP_WRITEPAGE_ACTIVATE
On Mon, 19 Nov 2007, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>
> 2.6.22-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us
> know.
>
> ------------------
> From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
>
> patch e423003028183df54f039dfda8b58c49e78c89d7 in mainline.
>
> This is a writeback-internal marker but we're propagating it all the way back
> to userspace!.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>
It's fine by me that this should go into 2.6.22-stable, but then please
also put in this related patch from 2.6.23-stable: it's arguable whether
either are strictly needed (they were originally provoked by unionfs, in
Ubuntu but not mainline), but more helpful to include than exclude them.
Thanks,
Hugh
Subject: [patch 12/13] fix tmpfs BUG and AOP_WRITEPAGE_ACTIVATE
-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
------------------
From: Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>
patch 487e9bf25cbae11b131d6a14bdbb3a6a77380837 in mainline.
It's possible to provoke unionfs (not yet in mainline, though in mm and
some distros) to hit shmem_writepage's BUG_ON(page_mapped(page)). I expect
it's possible to provoke the 2.6.23 ecryptfs in the same way (but the
2.6.24 ecryptfs no longer calls lower level's ->writepage).
This came to light with the recent find that AOP_WRITEPAGE_ACTIVATE could
leak from tmpfs via write_cache_pages and unionfs to userspace. There's
already a fix (e423003028183df54f039dfda8b58c49e78c89d7 - writeback: don't
propagate AOP_WRITEPAGE_ACTIVATE) in the tree for that, and it's okay so
far as it goes; but insufficient because it doesn't address the underlying
issue, that shmem_writepage expects to be called only by vmscan (relying on
backing_dev_info capabilities to prevent the normal writeback path from
ever approaching it).
That's an increasingly fragile assumption, and ramdisk_writepage (the other
source of AOP_WRITEPAGE_ACTIVATEs) is already careful to check
wbc->for_reclaim before returning it. Make the same check in
shmem_writepage, thereby sidestepping the page_mapped BUG also.
Signed-off-by: Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>
Cc: Erez Zadok <ezk@...sunysb.edu>
Reviewed-by: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>
---
mm/shmem.c | 15 +++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 15 insertions(+)
--- a/mm/shmem.c
+++ b/mm/shmem.c
@@ -916,6 +916,21 @@ static int shmem_writepage(struct page *
struct inode *inode;
BUG_ON(!PageLocked(page));
+ /*
+ * shmem_backing_dev_info's capabilities prevent regular writeback or
+ * sync from ever calling shmem_writepage; but a stacking filesystem
+ * may use the ->writepage of its underlying filesystem, in which case
+ * we want to do nothing when that underlying filesystem is tmpfs
+ * (writing out to swap is useful as a response to memory pressure, but
+ * of no use to stabilize the data) - just redirty the page, unlock it
+ * and claim success in this case. AOP_WRITEPAGE_ACTIVATE, and the
+ * page_mapped check below, must be avoided unless we're in reclaim.
+ */
+ if (!wbc->for_reclaim) {
+ set_page_dirty(page);
+ unlock_page(page);
+ return 0;
+ }
BUG_ON(page_mapped(page));
mapping = page->mapping;
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists