linux-kernel - Re: 9p EBADF with cache enabled (Was: 9p fs-cache tests/benchmark (was: 9p fscache Duplicate cookie detected))

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: <7091002.4ErQJAuLzZ@silver>
Date:   Fri, 06 May 2022 21:14:52 +0200
From:   Christian Schoenebeck <linux_oss@...debyte.com>
To:     asmadeus@...ewreck.org
Cc:     David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        David Kahurani <k.kahurani@...il.com>, davem@...emloft.net,
        ericvh@...il.com, kuba@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        lucho@...kov.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        v9fs-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net, Greg Kurz <groug@...d.org>
Subject: Re: 9p EBADF with cache enabled (Was: 9p fs-cache tests/benchmark (was: 9p
 fscache Duplicate cookie detected))

On Mittwoch, 4. Mai 2022 23:48:47 CEST asmadeus@...ewreck.org wrote:
> Christian Schoenebeck wrote on Wed, May 04, 2022 at 08:33:36PM +0200:
> > On Dienstag, 3. Mai 2022 12:21:23 CEST asmadeus@...ewreck.org wrote:
> > >  - add some complex code to track the exact byte range that got updated
> > > 
> > > in some conditions e.g. WRONLY or read fails?
> > > That'd still be useful depending on how the backend tracks file mode,
> > > qemu as user with security_model=mapped-file keeps files 600 but with
> > > passthrough or none qemu wouldn't be able to read the file regardless of
> > > what we do on client...
> > > Christian, if you still have an old kernel around did that use to work?
> > 
> > Sorry, what was the question, i.e. what should I test / look for
> > precisely? :)
> I was curious if older kernel does not issue read at all, or issues read
> on writeback fid correctly opened as root/RDRW
> 
> You can try either the append.c I pasted a few mails back or the dd
> commands, as regular user.
> 
> $ dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=1M count=1
> $ chmod 400 test
> # drop cache or remount
> $ dd if=/dev/urandom of=test bs=102 seek=2 count=1 conv=notrunc
> dd: error writing 'test': Bad file descriptor

Seems you were right, the old kernel opens the file with O_RDWR.

The following was taken with cache=loose, pre-netfs kernel version, using your
append code and file to be appended already containing 34 bytes, relevant file is fid 7:

  v9fs_open tag 0 id 12 fid 7 mode 2
  v9fs_open_return tag 0 id 12 qid={type 0 version 1651854932 path 3108899} iounit 4096
  v9fs_xattrwalk tag 0 id 30 fid 5 newfid 8 name security.capability
  v9fs_rerror tag 0 id 30 err 95
  v9fs_read tag 0 id 116 fid 7 off 0 max_count 4096
  v9fs_read_return tag 0 id 116 count 34 err 45
  v9fs_read tag 0 id 116 fid 7 off 34 max_count 4062
  v9fs_read_return tag 0 id 116 count 0 err 11
  v9fs_clunk tag 0 id 120 fid 6
  v9fs_clunk tag 0 id 120 fid 4
  [delay]
  v9fs_write tag 0 id 118 fid 7 off 0 count 39 cnt 1
  v9fs_write_return tag 0 id 118 total 39 err 11
  v9fs_fsync tag 0 id 50 fid 7 datasync 0

BTW to see this protocol debug output with QEMU:

  cd qemu/build
  ../configure --enable-trace-backends=log ...
  make -jN
  ./qemu-system-x86_64 -trace 'v9fs*' ...

Best regards,
Christian Schoenebeck