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  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:	Thu, 24 May 2012 08:41:35 +0400
From:	Stanislav Kinsbursky <skinsbursky@...allels.com>
To:	"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>
CC:	"linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"devel@...nvz.org" <devel@...nvz.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] NFSd: fix locking in nfsd_forget_delegations()

24.05.2012 01:31, J. Bruce Fields написал:
> On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 02:25:14PM +0400, Stanislav Kinsbursky wrote:
>> This patch adds recall_lock hold to nfsd_forget_delegations() to protect
>> nfsd_process_n_delegations() call.
>> Also, looks like it would be better to collect delegations to some local
>> on-stack list, and then unhash collected list. This split allows to simplify
>> locking, because delegation traversing is protected by recall_lock, when
>> delegation unhash is protected by client_mutex.
> All this indirection is getting a little much.
>
> How about replacing nfsd_process_n_delegations by something that always
> does the list-move?:

Is it correct?
List move is suitable for unhash delegations since we anyway remove 
delegation from fi_delegations list.
But seems we don't do this for delegations recall...


> void nfsd_forget_delegations(u64 num)
> {
> 	unsigned int count;
> 	list_head victims;
>
> 	nfs4_lock_state();
> 	count = nfsd_get_n_delegations(num,&victims);
> 	list_for_each_entry_safe(...,&victims, ...)
> 		unhash_delegation();
> 	unlock_state();
> }
>
> ditto for recall_delegations, and take the recall_lock inside
> nfsd_get_n_delegations?
>
> Or something like that.
>
> --b.
>
>> Signed-off-by: Stanislav Kinsbursky<skinsbursky@...allels.com>
>> ---
>>   fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c |   32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
>>   1 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
>> index 21266c7..f004e61 100644
>> --- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
>> +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
>> @@ -2597,7 +2597,7 @@ out:
>>   	return ret;
>>   }
>>
>> -static void nfsd_break_one_deleg(struct nfs4_delegation *dp)
>> +static void nfsd_break_one_deleg(struct nfs4_delegation *dp, void *data)
>>   {
>>   	/* We're assuming the state code never drops its reference
>>   	 * without first removing the lease.  Since we're in this lease
>> @@ -2633,7 +2633,7 @@ static void nfsd_break_deleg_cb(struct file_lock *fl)
>>   	spin_lock(&recall_lock);
>>   	fp->fi_had_conflict = true;
>>   	list_for_each_entry(dp,&fp->fi_delegations, dl_perfile)
>> -		nfsd_break_one_deleg(dp);
>> +		nfsd_break_one_deleg(dp, NULL);
>>   	spin_unlock(&recall_lock);
>>   }
>>
>> @@ -4694,7 +4694,7 @@ void nfsd_forget_openowners(u64 num)
>>   	printk(KERN_INFO "NFSD: Forgot %d open owners", count);
>>   }
>>
>> -int nfsd_process_n_delegations(u64 num, void (*deleg_func)(struct nfs4_delegation *))
>> +int nfsd_process_n_delegations(u64 num, void (*deleg_func)(struct nfs4_delegation *, void *), void *data)
>>   {
>>   	int i, count = 0;
>>   	struct nfs4_file *fp, *fnext;
>> @@ -4703,7 +4703,7 @@ int nfsd_process_n_delegations(u64 num, void (*deleg_func)(struct nfs4_delegatio
>>   	for (i = 0; i<  FILE_HASH_SIZE; i++) {
>>   		list_for_each_entry_safe(fp, fnext,&file_hashtbl[i], fi_hash) {
>>   			list_for_each_entry_safe(dp, dnext,&fp->fi_delegations, dl_perfile) {
>> -				deleg_func(dp);
>> +				deleg_func(dp, data);
>>   				if (++count == num)
>>   					return count;
>>   			}
>> @@ -4713,15 +4713,31 @@ int nfsd_process_n_delegations(u64 num, void (*deleg_func)(struct nfs4_delegatio
>>   	return count;
>>   }
>>
>> +/* Called under the recall_lock spinlock. */
>> +static void
>> +collect_delegation(struct nfs4_delegation *dp, void *data)
>> +{
>> +	struct list_head *list = data;
>> +
>> +	list_move(&dp->dl_perfile, list);
>> +}
>> +
>>   void nfsd_forget_delegations(u64 num)
>>   {
>>   	unsigned int count;
>> +	struct nfs4_delegation *dp, *dnext;
>> +	LIST_HEAD(unhash_list);
>>
>> -	nfs4_lock_state();
>> -	count = nfsd_process_n_delegations(num, unhash_delegation);
>> -	nfs4_unlock_state();
>> +	spin_lock(&recall_lock);
>> +	count = nfsd_process_n_delegations(num, collect_delegation,&unhash_list);
>> +	spin_unlock(&recall_lock);
>>
>>   	printk(KERN_INFO "NFSD: Forgot %d delegations", count);
>> +
>> +	nfs4_lock_state();
>> +	list_for_each_entry_safe(dp, dnext,&unhash_list, dl_perfile)
>> +		unhash_delegation(dp);
>> +	nfs4_unlock_state();
>>   }
>>
>>   void nfsd_recall_delegations(u64 num)
>> @@ -4730,7 +4746,7 @@ void nfsd_recall_delegations(u64 num)
>>
>>   	nfs4_lock_state();
>>   	spin_lock(&recall_lock);
>> -	count = nfsd_process_n_delegations(num, nfsd_break_one_deleg);
>> +	count = nfsd_process_n_delegations(num, nfsd_break_one_deleg, NULL);
>>   	spin_unlock(&recall_lock);
>>   	nfs4_unlock_state();
>>
>>

--
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