linux-kernel - Re: [BUG] kernel 3.1.0 possible circular locking dependency detected

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]

Date:	Mon, 31 Oct 2011 16:59:39 +0100
From:	Knut Petersen <Knut_Petersen@...nline.de>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, reiserfs-devel@...r.kernel.org,
	Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Subject: Re: [BUG] kernel 3.1.0 possible circular locking dependency detected

Am 31.10.2011 16:08, schrieb Linus Torvalds:
> [ Added a few more people to the cc ]
>
> On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 1:35 AM, Knut Petersen
> <Knut_Petersen@...nline.de>  wrote:
>> After a " rm -r /verybigdir" (about 12G on a 25G reiserfs 3.6partition)
>> I found the following report about a circular locking dependency in
>> kernel 3.1.0
> Heh. There is even a comment about the ordering violation:
>
> /* We use I_MUTEX_CHILD here to silence lockdep. It's safe because xattr
>   * mutation ops aren't called during rename or splace, which are the
>   * only other users of I_MUTEX_CHILD. It violates the ordering, but that's
>   * better than allocating another subclass just for this code. */
>
> and apparently the comment is wrong: we *do* end up looking up xattrs
> during splice, due to the security_inode_need_killpriv() thing.
>
> So I think this needs a suid (or sgid) file that has xattrs and is removed.

Well, after rm -r  /some_small_dir_with_suid_and_sgid_files
there was no warning in dmesg.

I restored a copy of /verybigdir and searched for sgid/suid files with
find /test -type f -perm +6000 -exec ls -l {} \;

Result: not a singe suid/sgid file in /verybigdir

But  rm -r /verybigdir triggered the warning again ...

knut

> That said, I suspect this is a false positive, because the actual
> unlink can never happen while somebody is splicing to/from the same
> file at the same time (because then the iput wouldn't be the last one
> for the inode, and the file removal would be delayed until the file
> has been closed for the last time).
>
> But the hacky use of "I_MUTEX_CHILD" is basically not the proper way
> to silence the lockdep splat.
>
> Anybody?
>
>                    Linus
>

--
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/