linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] vfs: fix race in rcu lookup of pruned dentry

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

Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.00.1107181533590.3909@sister.anvils>
Date:	Mon, 18 Jul 2011 15:43:29 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
cc:	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...nel.dk>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] vfs: fix race in rcu lookup of pruned dentry

On Mon, 18 Jul 2011, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 2:19 PM, Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com> wrote:
> >
> > __d_lookup_rcu() is being careful about *inode, yes.
> >
> > But I'd forgotten it was even setting it: doesn't that setting get
> > overridden later by the more careless *inode = path->d_entry->d_inode
> > at the head of __follow_mount_rcu()'s loop?
> >
> > Perhaps that line just needs to be moved to the tail of the loop?
> 
> Ahh. Bingo. Yes, I think you found it.
> 
> I don't think it should touch that *inode value in
> __follow_mount_rcu() unless we actually followed a mount, exactly
> because it will overwrite the thing that we were so careful about in
> __d_lookup_rcu().
> 
> So how about this patch that replaces the earlier mount-point sequence
> number one. The only difference is (as you mention) to just do the
> *inode update at the end of the loop, so that we don't overwrite the
> valid inode data with a non-checked one when we don't do anything.
> 
> Untested. But this should make my propised change to fs/dcache.c be
> irrelevant, because whether we clear d_inode or not, the existing
> sequence number checks will catch it. Agreed?

Yes, that looks like THE right fix to me, making others irrelevant.
But I haven't tested it either, won't begin to do so until tonight.
And I fear I won't notice if there's any silly little bug in there,
which forces every fast RCU lookup to go the slow way instead!

Inlined for the benefit of wider scrutiny:

 fs/namei.c |   21 +++++++++++++++++++--
 1 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/namei.c b/fs/namei.c
index 5c867dd1c0b3..b9cd558a00be 100644
--- a/fs/namei.c
+++ b/fs/namei.c
@@ -938,11 +938,12 @@ static bool __follow_mount_rcu(struct nameidata *nd, struct path *path,
 {
 	for (;;) {
 		struct vfsmount *mounted;
+		unsigned int seq;
+
 		/*
 		 * Don't forget we might have a non-mountpoint managed dentry
 		 * that wants to block transit.
 		 */
-		*inode = path->dentry->d_inode;
 		if (unlikely(managed_dentry_might_block(path->dentry)))
 			return false;
 
@@ -952,9 +953,25 @@ static bool __follow_mount_rcu(struct nameidata *nd, struct path *path,
 		mounted = __lookup_mnt(path->mnt, path->dentry, 1);
 		if (!mounted)
 			break;
+		seq = read_seqcount_begin(&mounted->mnt_root->d_seq);
+
+		/*
+		 * The memory barrier in read_seqcount_begin() is sufficient,
+		 * so we can use __read_seqcount_retry() to check the prev
+		 * sequence numbers.
+		 */
+		if (!__read_seqcount_retry(&path->dentry->d_seq, nd->seq))
+			return false;
 		path->mnt = mounted;
 		path->dentry = mounted->mnt_root;
-		nd->seq = read_seqcount_begin(&path->dentry->d_seq);
+		nd->seq = seq;
+
+		/*
+		 * Update the inode too. We don't need to re-check the
+		 * dentry sequence number here after this d_inode read,
+		 * because a mount-point is always pinned.
+		 */
+		*inode = path->dentry->d_inode;
 	}
 	return true;
 }
--
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/