[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181207175811.GZ2217@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2018 17:58:12 +0000
From: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
To: Alexander Lochmann <alexander.lochmann@...dortmund.de>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Horst Schirmeier <horst.schirmeier@...dortmund.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix sync. in blkdev_write_iter() acessing i_flags
On Fri, Dec 07, 2018 at 05:10:15PM +0100, Alexander Lochmann wrote:
>
> inode.i_flags might be altered without proper
> synchronisation when the inode belongs to devtmpfs.
> blkdev_write_iter() starts writing via __generic_file_write_iter()
> which sets S_NOSEC bit without any synchronisation.
> The following stacktrace shows how to get there:
> 13: entry_SYSENTER_32:460
> 12: do_fast_syscall_32:410
> 11: _static_cpu_has:146
> 10: do_syscall_32_irqs_on:322
> 09: SyS_pwrite64:636
> 08: SYSC_pwrite64:650
> 07: fdput:38
> 06: vfs_write:560
> 05: __vfs_write:512
> 04: new_sync_write:500
> 03: blkdev_write_iter:1977
> 02: __generic_file_write_iter:2897
> 01: file_remove_privs:1818
> 00: inode_has_no_xattr:3163
> If S_NOSEC is *not* set, i_rwsem is acquired around
> __generic_file_write_iter().
> + * Ensure excl. access to i_flags in __generic_file_write_iter().
> + * Otherwise, it would race with chmod adding SUID bit.
> + */
_What_ SUID bit? We are talking about a write to block device, for fsck sake...
Powered by blists - more mailing lists