linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ovl: use a dedicated semaphore for dir upperfile caching

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:   Mon, 04 Jan 2021 15:28:12 +0800
From:   Icenowy Zheng <icenowy@...c.io>
To:     Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com>
Cc:     Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>,
        Xiao Yang <yangx.jy@...fujitsu.com>,
        overlayfs <linux-unionfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ovl: use a dedicated semaphore for dir upperfile caching

在 2021-01-03星期日的 16:10 +0200，Amir Goldstein写道：
> On Fri, Jan 1, 2021 at 10:12 PM Icenowy Zheng <icenowy@...c.io>
> wrote:
> > 
> > The function ovl_dir_real_file() currently uses the semaphore of
> > the
> > inode to synchronize write to the upperfile cache field.
> > 
> > However, this function will get called by ovl_ioctl_set_flags(),
> > which
> > utilizes the inode semaphore too. In this case ovl_dir_real_file()
> > will
> > try to claim a lock that is owned by a function in its call stack,
> > which
> > won't get released before ovl_dir_real_file() returns.
> 
> oops. I wondered why I didn't see any warnings on this from lockdep.
> Ah! because the xfstest that exercises ovl_ioctl_set_flags() on
> directory,
> generic/079, starts with an already upper dir.
> 
> And the xfstest that checks chattr+i on lower/upper files,
> overlay/040,
> does not check chattr on dirs (ioctl on overlay dirs wasn't supported
> at
> the time the test was written).
> 
> Would you be able to create a variant of test overlay/040 that also
> tests
> chattr +i on lower/upper dirs to test your patch and confirm that the
> test
> fails on master with the appropriate Kconfig debug options.

https://gist.github.com/Icenowy/c7d8decb6812d6e5064d143c57281ad3

Here's a test that would break on master (I used linux-next/master for
test).

[  246.521880] INFO: task chattr:715 blocked for more than 122 seconds.
[  246.525659]       Not tainted 5.11.0-rc1-next-20210104+ #20
[  246.528498] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs"
disables this message.
[  246.535076] task:chattr          state:D stack:13736 pid:  715 ppid:
529 flags:0x00000000
[  246.538923] Call Trace:
[  246.540241]  __schedule+0x2a9/0x820
[  246.541986]  schedule+0x56/0xc0
[  246.543616]  rwsem_down_write_slowpath+0x375/0x630
[  246.545565]  ovl_dir_real_file+0xc1/0x120
[  246.547512]  ovl_real_fdget+0x35/0x80
[  246.549303]  ovl_real_ioctl+0x26/0x90
[  246.551050]  ? mnt_drop_write+0x2c/0x70
[  246.553068]  ovl_ioctl_set_flags+0x93/0x110
[  246.555407]  __x64_sys_ioctl+0x7e/0xb0
[  246.557175]  do_syscall_64+0x33/0x40
[  246.558869]  entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
[  246.561057] RIP: 0033:0x7fe4a3830b67
[  246.565799] RSP: 002b:00007ffe7ad504f8 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX:
0000000000000010
[  246.569438] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 0000000000000001 RCX:
00007fe4a3830b67
[  246.572061] RDX: 00007ffe7ad5050c RSI: 0000000040086602 RDI:
0000000000000003
[  246.575509] RBP: 0000000000000003 R08: 0000000000000001 R09:
0000000000000000
[  246.578932] R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000246 R12:
0000000000000010
[  246.581014] R13: 00007ffe7ad50810 R14: 0000000000000002 R15:
0000000000000001
[  246.582818] 
[  246.582818] Showing all locks held in the system:
[  246.584741] 1 lock held by khungtaskd/18:
[  246.586085]  #0: ffffffff9e951540 (rcu_read_lock){....}-{1:2}, at:
debug_show_all_locks+0x15/0x100
[  246.589775] 3 locks held by chattr/715:
[  246.591364]  #0: ffff96a74b92c450 (sb_writers#11){....}-{0:0}, at:
ovl_ioctl_set_flags+0x2f/0x110
[  246.597182]  #1: ffff96a7489c3500
(&ovl_i_mutex_dir_key[depth]){....}-{3:3}, at:
ovl_ioctl_set_flags+0x54/0x110
[  246.601325]  #2: ffff96a7489c3500
(&ovl_i_mutex_dir_key[depth]){....}-{3:3}, at:
ovl_dir_real_file+0xc1/0x120

> 
> > 
> > Define a dedicated semaphore for the upperfile cache, so that the
> > deadlock won't happen.
> > 
> > Fixes: 61536bed2149 ("ovl: support [S|G]ETFLAGS and FS[S|G]ETXATTR
> > ioctls for directories")
> > Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org # v5.10
> > Signed-off-by: Icenowy Zheng <icenowy@...c.io>
> > ---
> >  fs/overlayfs/readdir.c | 6 ++++--
> >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/fs/overlayfs/readdir.c b/fs/overlayfs/readdir.c
> > index 01620ebae1bd..f10701aabb71 100644
> > --- a/fs/overlayfs/readdir.c
> > +++ b/fs/overlayfs/readdir.c
> > @@ -56,6 +56,7 @@ struct ovl_dir_file {
> >         struct list_head *cursor;
> >         struct file *realfile;
> >         struct file *upperfile;
> > +       struct semaphore upperfile_sem;
> 
> mutex please
> 
> >  };
> > 
> >  static struct ovl_cache_entry *ovl_cache_entry_from_node(struct
> > rb_node *n)
> > @@ -883,7 +884,7 @@ struct file *ovl_dir_real_file(const struct
> > file *file, bool want_upper)
> >                         ovl_path_upper(dentry, &upperpath);
> >                         realfile = ovl_dir_open_realfile(file,
> > &upperpath);
> > 
> > -                       inode_lock(inode);
> > +                       down(&od->upperfile_sem);
> >                         if (!od->upperfile) {
> >                                 if (IS_ERR(realfile)) {
> >                                         inode_unlock(inode);
> 
> You missed this unlock

Thanks, will send v2 now.

> 
> Thanks,
> Amir.