linux-kernel - [47/71] 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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Thu, 19 May 2011 11:05:15 -0700
From:	Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...nel.org
Cc:	stable-review@...nel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk,
	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
Subject: [47/71] tmpfs: fix race between swapoff and writepage

2.6.38-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let us know.

------------------

From: Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>

commit 05bf86b4ccfd0f197da61c67bd372111d15a6620 upstream.

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>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>

--- a/mm/shmem.c
+++ b/mm/shmem.c
@@ -1037,7 +1037,6 @@ static int shmem_writepage(struct page *page, struct writeback_control *wbc)
 	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 *page, struct writeback_control *wbc)
 	 * 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/