linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V4 02/13] fs/xfs: Clarify lockdep dependency for xfs

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]

Message-ID: <20200221230043.GA6762@iweiny-DESK2.sc.intel.com>
Date:   Fri, 21 Feb 2020 15:00:44 -0800
From:   Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>
To:     Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
        linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 02/13] fs/xfs: Clarify lockdep dependency for
 xfs_isilocked()

On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 12:34:51PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 04:41:23PM -0800, ira.weiny@...el.com wrote:
> > From: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>
> > 
> > xfs_isilocked() can't work fully without CONFIG_LOCKDEP.  However,
> > making xfs_isilocked() dependant on CONFIG_LOCKDEP is not feasible
> > because it is used for more than the i_rwsem.  Therefore a short-circuit
> > was provided via debug_locks.  However, this caused confusion while
> > working through the xfs locking.
> > 
> > Rather than use debug_locks as a flag specify this clearly using
> > IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_LOCKDEP).
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>
> > 
> > ---
> > Changes from V3:
> > 	Reordered to be a "pre-cleanup" patch
> > 
> > Changes from V2:
> > 	This patch is new for V3
> > ---
> >  fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c
> > index c5077e6326c7..35df324875db 100644
> > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c
> > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_inode.c
> > @@ -364,7 +364,7 @@ xfs_isilocked(
> >  
> >  	if (lock_flags & (XFS_IOLOCK_EXCL|XFS_IOLOCK_SHARED)) {
> >  		if (!(lock_flags & XFS_IOLOCK_SHARED))
> > -			return !debug_locks ||
> > +			return !IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_LOCKDEP) ||
> >  				lockdep_is_held_type(&VFS_I(ip)->i_rwsem, 0);
> 
> This breaks expected lockdep behaviour.
> 
> We need to use debug_locks here because lockdep turns off lock
> checking via debug_locks when lockdep encounters a locking
> inconsistency.  We only want to know about the first locking
> problem, not spew cascading lock problems over and over once we
> already know there is a locking problem.

Ah...  ok...  Seems like that should be part of the lockdep interface...

I'll drop the patch for now,
Ira

> 
> IOWs, checking debug_locks is required here for the same reason it
> is used in lockdep_assert_held_{read/write}(). essentially we are
> open coding lockdep_assert_held_write() here because this function
> is only called from within ASSERT() statements and we don't want
> multiple WARN/BUGs being issued when this triggers....
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Dave.
> -- 
> Dave Chinner
> david@...morbit.com