| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CACVXFVPtaG4EDjAJ5G=Qz29fE4Zfp==W0izdCK06ZnJm17jO8Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2015 14:50:59 +0800
From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>
To: Jarod Wilson <jarod@...hat.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Markus Pargmann <mpa@...gutronix.de>,
Stefan Weinhuber <wein@...ibm.com>,
Stefan Haberland <stefan.haberland@...ibm.com>,
Sebastian Ott <sebott@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Fabian Frederick <fabf@...net.be>,
David Herrmann <dh.herrmann@...il.com>,
Mike Galbraith <bitbucket@...ine.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
"nbd-general@...ts.sourceforge.net"
<nbd-general@...ts.sourceforge.net>, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/7] block: loop: don't hold lo_ctl_mutex in lo_open
Hi Jarod,
On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 2:23 PM, Jarod Wilson <jarod@...hat.com> wrote:
> From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>
>
> The lo_ctl_mutex is held for running all ioctl handlers, and
> in some ioctl handlers, ioctl_by_bdev(BLKRRPART) is called for
> rereading partitions, which requires bd_mutex.
>
> So it is easy to cause failure because trylock(bd_mutex) may
> fail inside blkdev_reread_part(), and follows the lock context:
>
> blkid or other application:
> ->open()
> ->mutex_lock(bd_mutex)
> ->lo_open()
> ->mutex_lock(lo_ctl_mutex)
>
> losetup(set fd ioctl):
> ->mutex_lock(lo_ctl_mutex)
> ->ioctl_by_bdev(BLKRRPART)
> ->trylock(bd_mutex)
>
> This patch trys to eliminate the ABBA lock dependency by removing
> lo_ctl_mutext in lo_open() with the following approach:
>
> 1) introduce lo_open_mutex to protect lo_refcnt and avoid acquiring
> lo_ctl_mutex in lo_open():
It is a bit quick since I said the lo_open_mutex can be removed,
and Christoph agreed that too.
So looks we still need to post another version, :-)
> - for open vs. add/del loop, no any problem because of loop_index_mutex
> - lo_open_mutex is used for syncing open() and loop_clr_fd()
> - both open() and release() have been serialized by bd_mutex already
>
> 2) don't hold lo_ctl_mutex for decreasing/checking lo_refcnt in
> lo_release(), then lo_ctl_mutex is only required for the last release.
>
> CC: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
> CC: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
> CC: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
> CC: Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
> CC: Markus Pargmann <mpa@...gutronix.de>
> CC: Stefan Weinhuber <wein@...ibm.com>
> CC: Stefan Haberland <stefan.haberland@...ibm.com>
> CC: Sebastian Ott <sebott@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> CC: Fabian Frederick <fabf@...net.be>
> CC: Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>
> CC: David Herrmann <dh.herrmann@...il.com>
> CC: Mike Galbraith <bitbucket@...ine.de>
> CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
> CC: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
> CC: nbd-general@...ts.sourceforge.net
> CC: linux-s390@...r.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jarod Wilson <jarod@...hat.com>
> ---
> drivers/block/loop.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> drivers/block/loop.h | 1 +
> 2 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/block/loop.c b/drivers/block/loop.c
> index d1f168b..81a6bc1 100644
> --- a/drivers/block/loop.c
> +++ b/drivers/block/loop.c
> @@ -879,14 +879,18 @@ static int loop_clr_fd(struct loop_device *lo)
> * <dev>/do something like mkfs/losetup -d <dev> causing the losetup -d
> * command to fail with EBUSY.
> */
> + mutex_lock(&lo->lo_open_mutex);
> if (lo->lo_refcnt > 1) {
> + mutex_unlock(&lo->lo_open_mutex);
> lo->lo_flags |= LO_FLAGS_AUTOCLEAR;
> mutex_unlock(&lo->lo_ctl_mutex);
> return 0;
> }
>
> - if (filp == NULL)
> + if (filp == NULL) {
> + mutex_unlock(&lo->lo_open_mutex);
> return -EINVAL;
> + }
>
> spin_lock_irq(&lo->lo_lock);
> lo->lo_state = Lo_rundown;
> @@ -919,6 +923,15 @@ static int loop_clr_fd(struct loop_device *lo)
> lo->lo_state = Lo_unbound;
> /* This is safe: open() is still holding a reference. */
> module_put(THIS_MODULE);
> +
> + /*
> + * Unlock open_mutex for avoiding -EBUSY of rereading part:
> + * - try to acquire bd_mutex from reread part
> + * - another task is opening the loop with holding bd_mutex
> + * and trys to acquire open_mutex
> + */
> + mutex_unlock(&lo->lo_open_mutex);
> +
> if (lo->lo_flags & LO_FLAGS_PARTSCAN && bdev)
> ioctl_by_bdev(bdev, BLKRRPART, 0);
> lo->lo_flags = 0;
> @@ -1376,9 +1389,9 @@ static int lo_open(struct block_device *bdev, fmode_t mode)
> goto out;
> }
>
> - mutex_lock(&lo->lo_ctl_mutex);
> + mutex_lock(&lo->lo_open_mutex);
> lo->lo_refcnt++;
> - mutex_unlock(&lo->lo_ctl_mutex);
> + mutex_unlock(&lo->lo_open_mutex);
> out:
> mutex_unlock(&loop_index_mutex);
> return err;
> @@ -1387,13 +1400,16 @@ out:
> static void lo_release(struct gendisk *disk, fmode_t mode)
> {
> struct loop_device *lo = disk->private_data;
> - int err;
> + int err, ref;
>
> - mutex_lock(&lo->lo_ctl_mutex);
> + mutex_lock(&lo->lo_open_mutex);
> + ref = --lo->lo_refcnt;
> + mutex_unlock(&lo->lo_open_mutex);
>
> - if (--lo->lo_refcnt)
> + if (ref)
> goto out;
>
> + mutex_lock(&lo->lo_ctl_mutex);
> if (lo->lo_flags & LO_FLAGS_AUTOCLEAR) {
> /*
> * In autoclear mode, stop the loop thread
> @@ -1646,6 +1662,7 @@ static int loop_add(struct loop_device **l, int i)
> disk->flags |= GENHD_FL_NO_PART_SCAN;
> disk->flags |= GENHD_FL_EXT_DEVT;
> mutex_init(&lo->lo_ctl_mutex);
> + mutex_init(&lo->lo_open_mutex);
> lo->lo_number = i;
> spin_lock_init(&lo->lo_lock);
> disk->major = LOOP_MAJOR;
> @@ -1763,11 +1780,14 @@ static long loop_control_ioctl(struct file *file, unsigned int cmd,
> mutex_unlock(&lo->lo_ctl_mutex);
> break;
> }
> + mutex_lock(&lo->lo_open_mutex);
> if (lo->lo_refcnt > 0) {
> ret = -EBUSY;
> + mutex_unlock(&lo->lo_open_mutex);
> mutex_unlock(&lo->lo_ctl_mutex);
> break;
> }
> + mutex_unlock(&lo->lo_open_mutex);
> lo->lo_disk->private_data = NULL;
> mutex_unlock(&lo->lo_ctl_mutex);
> idr_remove(&loop_index_idr, lo->lo_number);
> diff --git a/drivers/block/loop.h b/drivers/block/loop.h
> index 301c27f..1b4acf2 100644
> --- a/drivers/block/loop.h
> +++ b/drivers/block/loop.h
> @@ -59,6 +59,7 @@ struct loop_device {
> bool write_started;
> int lo_state;
> struct mutex lo_ctl_mutex;
> + struct mutex lo_open_mutex;
>
> struct request_queue *lo_queue;
> struct blk_mq_tag_set tag_set;
> --
> 1.8.3.1
>
--
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