[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090319153704.GZ14127@parisc-linux.org>
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 09:37:04 -0600
From: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>
To: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Cc: "hooanon05@...oo.co.jp" <hooanon05@...oo.co.jp>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Q: NFSD readdir in linux-2.6.28
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 03:17:17PM +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > In 2.6.27, when nfs3svc_encode_entry_plus() calls lookup_one_len(), the
> > i_mutex lock was acquired by vfs_readdir() and it was not a problem.
> >
> > After the commit (above), nfsd_readdir/nfsd_buffered_readdir/vfs_readdir
> > calls nfsd_buffered_filldir(), and nfs3svc_encode_entry_plus() is called
> > later.
> > In this sequence, lookup_one_len() is called without i_mutex held.
> >
> > Isn't it a problem?
>
> Yes, well spotted. It didn't matter when the buffered readdir() was
> purely internal to XFS, because it didn't matter there that we called
> ->lookup() without i_mutex set. But now we're exposing arbitrary file
> systems to it, we need to make sure we follow the locking rules.
>
> I _think_ it's sufficient to make the affected callers of
> lookup_one_len() lock the parent's i_mutex for themselves before calling
> it. I'll take a closer look...
Should we also add this?
---
Ensure inode is locked in lookup_one_len()
Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...ux.intel.com>
diff --git a/fs/namei.c b/fs/namei.c
index bbc15c2..476b1d0 100644
--- a/fs/namei.c
+++ b/fs/namei.c
@@ -1244,6 +1244,7 @@ struct dentry *lookup_one_len(const char *name, struct dentry *base, int len)
int err;
struct qstr this;
+ BUG_ON(!mutex_is_locked(&base->d_inode->i_mutex));
err = __lookup_one_len(name, &this, base, len);
if (err)
return ERR_PTR(err);
--
Matthew Wilcox Intel Open Source Technology Centre
"Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this
operating system, but compare it to ours. We can't possibly take such
a retrograde step."
--
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