linux-kernel - [PATCH] tmpfs: fix race between swapoff and writepage

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.00.1105141201190.1906@sister.anvils>
Date:	Sat, 14 May 2011 12:06:42 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
cc:	Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@...nvz.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: [PATCH] tmpfs: fix race between swapoff and writepage

Shame on me!  Commit b1dea800ac39 "tmpfs: fix race between umount and
writepage" fixed the advertized race, but introduced another: as even
its comment makes clear, we cannot safely rely on a peek at list_empty()
while holding no lock - until info->swapped is set, shmem_unuse_inode()
may delete any formerly-swapped inode from the shmem_swaplist, which
in this case would leave a swap area impossible to swapoff.

Although I don't relish taking the mutex every time, I don't care much
for the alternatives either; and at least the peek at list_empty() in
shmem_evict_inode() (a hotter path since most inodes would never have
been swapped) remains safe, because we already truncated the whole file.

Signed-off-by: Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
Cc: stable@...nel.org
---

 mm/shmem.c |   10 ++++------
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

--- 2.6.39-rc7+/mm/shmem.c	2011-05-09 21:09:49.861399310 -0700
+++ linux/mm/shmem.c	2011-05-14 03:48:02.719548428 -0700
@@ -1037,7 +1037,6 @@ static int shmem_writepage(struct page *
 	struct address_space *mapping;
 	unsigned long index;
 	struct inode *inode;
-	bool unlock_mutex = false;
 
 	BUG_ON(!PageLocked(page));
 	mapping = page->mapping;
@@ -1072,15 +1071,14 @@ static int shmem_writepage(struct page *
 	 * we've taken the spinlock, because shmem_unuse_inode() will
 	 * prune a !swapped inode from the swaplist under both locks.
 	 */
-	if (swap.val && list_empty(&info->swaplist)) {
+	if (swap.val) {
 		mutex_lock(&shmem_swaplist_mutex);
-		/* move instead of add in case we're racing */
-		list_move_tail(&info->swaplist, &shmem_swaplist);
-		unlock_mutex = true;
+		if (list_empty(&info->swaplist))
+			list_add_tail(&info->swaplist, &shmem_swaplist);
 	}
 
 	spin_lock(&info->lock);
-	if (unlock_mutex)
+	if (swap.val)
 		mutex_unlock(&shmem_swaplist_mutex);
 
 	if (index >= info->next_index) {
--
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/