linux-kernel - Re: dcache shrink list corruption?

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:	Wed, 30 Apr 2014 20:42:01 +0200
From:	Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
To:	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: dcache shrink list corruption?

On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 8:36 PM, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 07:33:38PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 6:03 PM, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>> > On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 05:49:58PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
>> >> > FWIW, the first two are really straightforward expanding the function
>> >> > into its only callsite.  The last needs more splitup.  Not sure if the
>> >> > following is good enough, but it ought to be at least somewhat cleaner.
>> >> > Combined change is identical to the original, so it doesn't invalidate
>> >> > the testing so far...
>> >>
>> >> Hmm, patches look okay, but I'm wondering if we really need the morgue list and
>> >> the waiting.  Why not just skip dentries that are presently being handled by
>> >> dentry_kill()?
>> >
>> > Who will be freeing them?  If we do that from dentry_kill(), we are back to
>> > needing them removed from shrink list by something called by dput().  And
>> > if we do that from shrink_dentry_list(), we'd damn better wait for
>> > dentry_iput() et.al. to finish.
>>
>> We can do it from dput if the shrinker gets there first and from the
>> shrinker if dput manages to finish before.  See the updated patch in
>> the previous mail.
>
> Er?  The only patch I see is removal of RCU from shrink_dentry_list(), which
> is fine, but doesn't do anything of that sort.  What was the Message-ID?

Message-ID: <20140430154958.GC3113@...sk.piliscsaba.szeredi.hu>

>
> Let me see if I understand what you are proposing:
>         dentry_kill(dentry, 0) seeing DCACHE_DENTRY_KILLED
>                 check DCACHE_MAY_FREE, free it's been set
>         dentry_kill(dentry, 1) seeing that we are on shrinker list
>                 leave on the list, do the work on killing, retake ->d_lock,
>                 if we are still on shrinker list
>                         set DCACHE_MAY_FREE,
>                 else
>                         free it
>
> That would probably work...

Exactly.

Thanks,
Miklos
--
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/