linux-kernel - Re: NFS lockdep lock misordering mmap_sem<->i_mutex

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <20091215233841.GE22392@basil.fritz.box>
Date:	Wed, 16 Dec 2009 00:38:41 +0100
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
Cc:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Trond.Myklebust@...app.com
Subject: Re: NFS lockdep lock misordering mmap_sem<->i_mutex_key with
	2.6.32-git1

On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 10:21:34PM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 07, 2009 at 02:20:09PM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > >    nfs_readdir
> > >      nfs_do_filldir
> > >        filldir
> > >          copy_to_user
> > >            [page_fault]			[grab mmap_sem]
> > > 
> > >  sys_mmap				[grab mmap_sem]
> > >    do_mmap_pgoff
> > >      mmap_region
> > >        nfs_file_mmap
> > >          nfs_revalidate_mapping  
> > >            nfs_invalidate_mapping	[grab i_mutex]
> > > 
> > > I guess recent lockdep improvement find old bug.
> > 
> > Thanks for the analysis.
> > 
> > I guess should never do copy_*_user while holding i_mutex? There might
> > be lots of cases like that.
> 
> No.  mmap_sem inside i_mutex is the normal order; NFS mmap is doing the
> wrong thing here.  Note that readdir() vs. NFS (file-only, thankfully ;-)
> mmap() is a non-issue; NFS mmap() vs. write() is much more interesting.

I see.

> 
> Again, a lot of mm/* code expects i_mutex, then mmap_sem order.  It's not
> just readdir().

I suppose an easy workaround would be to not revalidate in mmap,
because open should have already done that?

Very lightly tested RFC patch attached.

-Andi

---

NFS: don't revalidate in mmap

nfs_revalidate_mapping takes i_mutex, but mmap already has mmap_sem
hold and taking i_mutex inside mmap_sem is not allowed by the VFS.

So don't revalidate on mmap time and trust it has been already done.

Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>

---
 fs/nfs/file.c |    7 +------
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 6 deletions(-)

Index: linux-2.6.32-ak/fs/nfs/file.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.32-ak.orig/fs/nfs/file.c
+++ linux-2.6.32-ak/fs/nfs/file.c
@@ -297,14 +297,9 @@ nfs_file_mmap(struct file * file, struct
 	dprintk("NFS: mmap(%s/%s)\n",
 		dentry->d_parent->d_name.name, dentry->d_name.name);
 
-	/* Note: generic_file_mmap() returns ENOSYS on nommu systems
-	 *       so we call that before revalidating the mapping
-	 */
 	status = generic_file_mmap(file, vma);
-	if (!status) {
+	if (!status)
 		vma->vm_ops = &nfs_file_vm_ops;
-		status = nfs_revalidate_mapping(inode, file->f_mapping);
-	}
 	return status;
 }
 
-- 
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
--
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/