| 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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2010 10:38:07 +0100
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
Cc: viro@...IV.linux.org.uk, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] fs: rcu protect inode hash lookups
Le lundi 01 novembre 2010 à 16:33 +1100, Dave Chinner a écrit :
> From: Dave Chinner <dchinner@...hat.com>
>
> Now that inodes are using RCU freeing, we can walk the hash lists
> using RCU protection during lookups. Convert all the hash list
> operations to use RCU-based operators and drop the inode_hash_lock
> around pure lookup operations.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@...hat.com>
You probably should copy Paul on this stuff, I added him in Cc, because
SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU is really tricky, and Paul review is a must.
> ---
> fs/inode.c | 89 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
> 1 files changed, 57 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/inode.c b/fs/inode.c
> index 106ec7a..6bead3d 100644
> --- a/fs/inode.c
> +++ b/fs/inode.c
> @@ -50,11 +50,12 @@
> * inode->i_lock
> *
> * inode_hash_lock
> - * inode_sb_list_lock
> - * inode->i_lock
> + * rcu_read_lock
> + * inode_sb_list_lock
> + * inode->i_lock
> *
> * iunique_lock
> - * inode_hash_lock
> + * rcu_read_lock
> */
>
> /*
> @@ -413,7 +414,7 @@ void __insert_inode_hash(struct inode *inode, unsigned long hashval)
>
> spin_lock(&inode_hash_lock);
> spin_lock(&inode->i_lock);
> - hlist_add_head(&inode->i_hash, b);
> + hlist_add_head_rcu(&inode->i_hash, b);
> spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock);
> spin_unlock(&inode_hash_lock);
> }
> @@ -429,7 +430,7 @@ void remove_inode_hash(struct inode *inode)
> {
> spin_lock(&inode_hash_lock);
> spin_lock(&inode->i_lock);
> - hlist_del_init(&inode->i_hash);
> + hlist_del_init_rcu(&inode->i_hash);
> spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock);
> spin_unlock(&inode_hash_lock);
> }
> @@ -741,26 +742,38 @@ static void __wait_on_freeing_inode(struct inode *inode);
> static struct inode *find_inode(struct super_block *sb,
> struct hlist_head *head,
> int (*test)(struct inode *, void *),
> - void *data)
> + void *data, bool locked)
> {
> struct hlist_node *node;
> struct inode *inode = NULL;
>
> repeat:
> + rcu_read_lock();
> hlist_for_each_entry(inode, node, head, i_hash) {
> if (inode->i_sb != sb)
> continue;
> if (!test(inode, data))
> continue;
> spin_lock(&inode->i_lock);
Problem with SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU is the inode can be freed, and reused
immediately (no grace period) by another cpu.
So you need to recheck test(inode, data) _after_ getting a stable
reference on the inode (spin_lock() in this case), to make sure you
indeed found the inode you are looking for, not another one.
The test on inode->i_sb != sb can be omitted, _if_ each sb has its own
kmem_cache (but I am not sure, please check if this is the case)
Also, you should make sure the allocation of inode is careful of not
overwriting some fields (the i_lock in particular), since you could
break a concurrent lookup. This is really tricky, you cannot use
spin_lock_init(&inode->i_lock) anymore in inode_init_always().
You can read Documentation/RCU/rculist_nulls.txt for some doc I wrote
when adding SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU to UDP/TCP sockets. Sockets stable
reference is not a spinlock, but a refcount, so it was easier to init
this refcount. With a spinlock, I believe you might need to use SLAB
constructor, to initialize the spinlock only on fresh objects, not on
reused ones.
> + if (inode_unhashed(inode)) {
> + spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock);
> + continue;
> + }
> if (inode->i_state & (I_FREEING|I_WILL_FREE)) {
> + rcu_read_unlock();
> + if (locked)
> + spin_unlock(&inode_hash_lock);
> __wait_on_freeing_inode(inode);
> + if (locked)
> + spin_lock(&inode_hash_lock);
> goto repeat;
> }
> __iget(inode);
> spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock);
> + rcu_read_unlock();
> return inode;
> }
> + rcu_read_unlock();
> return NULL;
> }
>
> @@ -769,26 +782,39 @@ repeat:
> * iget_locked for details.
> */
> static struct inode *find_inode_fast(struct super_block *sb,
> - struct hlist_head *head, unsigned long ino)
> + struct hlist_head *head, unsigned long ino,
> + bool locked)
> {
> struct hlist_node *node;
> struct inode *inode = NULL;
>
> repeat:
> + rcu_read_lock();
> hlist_for_each_entry(inode, node, head, i_hash) {
> if (inode->i_ino != ino)
> continue;
> if (inode->i_sb != sb)
> continue;
> spin_lock(&inode->i_lock);
same here, you must recheck if (inode->i_ino != ino)
> + if (inode_unhashed(inode)) {
> + spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock);
> + continue;
> + }
> if (inode->i_state & (I_FREEING|I_WILL_FREE)) {
> + rcu_read_unlock();
> + if (locked)
> + spin_unlock(&inode_hash_lock);
> __wait_on_freeing_inode(inode);
> + if (locked)
> + spin_lock(&inode_hash_lock);
> goto repeat;
> }
> __iget(inode);
> spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock);
> + rcu_read_unlock();
> return inode;
> }
> + rcu_read_unlock();
> return NULL;
> }
>
> @@ -913,14 +939,14 @@ static struct inode *get_new_inode(struct super_block *sb,
>
> spin_lock(&inode_hash_lock);
> /* We released the lock, so.. */
> - old = find_inode(sb, head, test, data);
> + old = find_inode(sb, head, test, data, true);
> if (!old) {
> if (set(inode, data))
> goto set_failed;
>
> spin_lock(&inode->i_lock);
> inode->i_state = I_NEW;
> - hlist_add_head(&inode->i_hash, head);
> + hlist_add_head_rcu(&inode->i_hash, head);
> spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock);
> inode_sb_list_add(inode);
> spin_unlock(&inode_hash_lock);
> @@ -964,12 +990,12 @@ static struct inode *get_new_inode_fast(struct super_block *sb,
>
> spin_lock(&inode_hash_lock);
> /* We released the lock, so.. */
> - old = find_inode_fast(sb, head, ino);
> + old = find_inode_fast(sb, head, ino, true);
> if (!old) {
> inode->i_ino = ino;
> spin_lock(&inode->i_lock);
> inode->i_state = I_NEW;
> - hlist_add_head(&inode->i_hash, head);
> + hlist_add_head_rcu(&inode->i_hash, head);
> spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock);
> inode_sb_list_add(inode);
> spin_unlock(&inode_hash_lock);
> @@ -1006,15 +1032,22 @@ static int test_inode_iunique(struct super_block *sb, unsigned long ino)
> struct hlist_node *node;
> struct inode *inode;
>
> - spin_lock(&inode_hash_lock);
> - hlist_for_each_entry(inode, node, b, i_hash) {
> - if (inode->i_ino == ino && inode->i_sb == sb) {
> - spin_unlock(&inode_hash_lock);
> - return 0;
> + rcu_read_lock();
> + hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(inode, node, b, i_hash) {
> + if (inode->i_ino != ino)
> + continue;
> + if (inode->i_sb != sb)
> + continue;
> + spin_lock(&inode->i_lock);
same here
> + if (inode_unhashed(inode)) {
> + spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock);
> + continue;
> }
> + spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock);
> + rcu_read_unlock();
> + return 0;
> }
> - spin_unlock(&inode_hash_lock);
> -
> + rcu_read_unlock();
> return 1;
> }
--
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