linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 3/7] kernfs: use VFS negative dentry 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]

Message-ID: <CAJfpegunvr-0b1SW2FDNRdaExr=A9OFH1K-g7d0+UiS+9j5V_w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 11 Jun 2021 15:07:08 +0200
From:   Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
To:     Ian Kent <raven@...maw.net>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...deen.net>,
        Fox Chen <foxhlchen@...il.com>,
        Brice Goglin <brice.goglin@...il.com>,
        Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Rick Lindsley <ricklind@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
        "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
        Carlos Maiolino <cmaiolino@...hat.com>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 3/7] kernfs: use VFS negative dentry caching

On Wed, 9 Jun 2021 at 10:50, Ian Kent <raven@...maw.net> wrote:
>
> If there are many lookups for non-existent paths these negative lookups
> can lead to a lot of overhead during path walks.
>
> The VFS allows dentries to be created as negative and hashed, and caches
> them so they can be used to reduce the fairly high overhead alloc/free
> cycle that occurs during these lookups.
>
> Use the kernfs node parent revision to identify if a change has been
> made to the containing directory so that the negative dentry can be
> discarded and the lookup redone.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ian Kent <raven@...maw.net>
> ---
>  fs/kernfs/dir.c |   52 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
>  1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/kernfs/dir.c b/fs/kernfs/dir.c
> index b3d1bc0f317d0..4f037456a8e17 100644
> --- a/fs/kernfs/dir.c
> +++ b/fs/kernfs/dir.c
> @@ -1039,9 +1039,28 @@ static int kernfs_dop_revalidate(struct dentry *dentry, unsigned int flags)
>         if (flags & LOOKUP_RCU)
>                 return -ECHILD;
>
> -       /* Always perform fresh lookup for negatives */
> -       if (d_really_is_negative(dentry))
> -               goto out_bad_unlocked;
> +       /* Negative hashed dentry? */
> +       if (d_really_is_negative(dentry)) {
> +               struct dentry *d_parent = dget_parent(dentry);
> +               struct kernfs_node *parent;
> +
> +               /* If the kernfs parent node has changed discard and
> +                * proceed to ->lookup.
> +                */
> +               parent = kernfs_dentry_node(d_parent);
> +               if (parent) {
> +                       if (kernfs_dir_changed(parent, dentry)) {

Perhaps add a note about this being dependent on parent of a negative
dentry never changing.

If this was backported to a kernel where this assumption doesn't hold,
there would be a mathematical chance of a false negative.

Thanks,
Miklos