linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] vfs: allow umount to handle mountpoints without revalidating them

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

Message-ID: <20130819164857.3d6876e4@tlielax.poochiereds.net>
Date:	Mon, 19 Aug 2013 16:48:57 -0400
From:	Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] vfs: allow umount to handle mountpoints without
 revalidating them

On Mon, 19 Aug 2013 13:35:03 -0700
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:

> On Fri, 26 Jul 2013 06:23:25 -0400 Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com> wrote:
> 
> > Christopher reported a regression where he was unable to unmount a NFS
> > filesystem where the root had gone stale. The problem is that
> > d_revalidate handles the root of the filesystem differently from other
> > dentries, but d_weak_revalidate does not. We could simply fix this by
> > making d_weak_revalidate return success on IS_ROOT dentries, but there
> > are cases where we do want to revalidate the root of the fs.
> > 
> > A umount is really a special case. We generally aren't interested in
> > anything but the dentry and vfsmount that's attached at that point. If
> > the inode turns out to be stale we just don't care since the intent is
> > to stop using it anyway.
> > 
> > Try to handle this situation better by treating umount as a special
> > case in the lookup code. Have it resolve the parent using normal
> > means, and then do a lookup of the final dentry without revalidating
> > it. In most cases, the final lookup will come out of the dcache, but
> > the case where there's a trailing symlink or !LAST_NORM entry on the
> > end complicates things a bit.
> > 
> 
> In which kernel version did the regression occur?  The patch *applies*
> to 3.8 and perhaps earlier, but we don't know which kernel versions
> actually need it.

v3.9 introduced the regression that I'm aware of (in commit
ecf3d1f1aa), but there have been problems with unmounting of stale
mountpoints for longer than that.

-- 
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>
--
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/