linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] acct: fix possible deadlock in acct_pin

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:   Thu, 4 Apr 2019 20:19:08 +0100
From:   Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
To:     Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com>
Cc:     Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] acct: fix possible deadlock in acct_pin_kill

On Thu, Apr 04, 2019 at 01:52:55PM +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote:

> If new file is on the same fs as old file, acct_pin_kill(old) fail to
> file_start_write_trylock() and skip writing the old file, because
> sb_writers (of new) is already taken by acct_on().

	The above is BS, BTW.  sb_start_write() does *not*
make file_start_write_trylock() to fail.  It's basically
percpu_down_read() vs. percpu_down_read_trylock().

sb_wait_write() would have file_start_write_trylock() fail (as it
should - its caller is freeze_super(); we want an exclusion with
attempts to start extra writes there).  sb_start_write() sure as
hell doesn't - if it would have, we would get its failures from
things like e.g. truncate(2) somewhere on the same fs.

We don't want to mess with anything freeze-related in acct_on(), but
the bug you are refering to in this part really doesn't exist.