linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] netfs: release the folio lock and put the folio before retrying

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: <YsJMCZB/ecQQha+/@casper.infradead.org>
Date:   Mon, 4 Jul 2022 03:10:17 +0100
From:   Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To:     Xiubo Li <xiubli@...hat.com>
Cc:     Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>, idryomov@...il.com,
        dhowells@...hat.com, vshankar@...hat.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ceph-devel@...r.kernel.org,
        keescook@...omium.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-cachefs@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] netfs: release the folio lock and put the folio
 before retrying

On Mon, Jul 04, 2022 at 09:13:44AM +0800, Xiubo Li wrote:
> On 7/1/22 6:38 PM, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > I don't know here... I think it might be better to just expect that when
> > this function returns an error that the folio has already been unlocked.
> > Doing it this way will mean that you will lock and unlock the folio a
> > second time for no reason.
> > 
> > Maybe something like this instead?
> > 
> > diff --git a/fs/netfs/buffered_read.c b/fs/netfs/buffered_read.c
> > index 42f892c5712e..8ae7b0f4c909 100644
> > --- a/fs/netfs/buffered_read.c
> > +++ b/fs/netfs/buffered_read.c
> > @@ -353,7 +353,7 @@ int netfs_write_begin(struct netfs_inode *ctx,
> >                          trace_netfs_failure(NULL, NULL, ret, netfs_fail_check_write_begin);
> >                          if (ret == -EAGAIN)
> >                                  goto retry;
> > -                       goto error;
> > +                       goto error_unlocked;
> >                  }
> >          }
> > @@ -418,6 +418,7 @@ int netfs_write_begin(struct netfs_inode *ctx,
> >   error:
> >          folio_unlock(folio);
> >          folio_put(folio);
> > +error_unlocked:
> >          _leave(" = %d", ret);
> >          return ret;
> >   }
> 
> Then the "afs" won't work correctly:
> 
> 377 static int afs_check_write_begin(struct file *file, loff_t pos, unsigned
> len,
> 378                                  struct folio *folio, void **_fsdata)
> 379 {
> 380         struct afs_vnode *vnode = AFS_FS_I(file_inode(file));
> 381
> 382         return test_bit(AFS_VNODE_DELETED, &vnode->flags) ? -ESTALE : 0;
> 383 }
> 
> The "afs" does nothing with the folio lock.

It's OK to fix AFS too.