linux-kernel - Re: WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 14735 at fs/dcache.c:365 dentry

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <0aa365ca-a9f0-8d15-b515-adb8823f5d28@gmx.de>
Date:   Tue, 19 Jul 2022 18:32:04 +0200
From:   Helge Deller <deller@....de>
To:     Hillf Danton <hdanton@...a.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 14735 at fs/dcache.c:365
 dentry_free+0x100/0x128

Hello Hillf,

On 7/17/22 13:36, Hillf Danton wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Jul 2022 11:42:48 +0200
>> I used WARN_ON() instead of BUG_ON().
>> With that, both triggered, first the first one, then the second one.
>> Full log is here:
>> http://dellerweb.de/testcases/minicom.dcache.crash.6-warn
>
> Given the first BUG_ON triggered, and dentry at the moment is supposed to
> not be alias, see if it is still in lookup with d_lock held. That is the
> step before de-unioning d_alias with d_in_lookup_hash.
>
> On the other hand if only the second one triggered, we should track
> DCACHE_DENTRY_KILLED instead in assumption that killed dentry was
> used again after releasing d_lock surrounding the firt one.

The machine has now been up for 2 days without any issues, while it had pretty
much the same load as when it was crashing earlier.
So, in summary I'd assume that your patch below fixes the issue.

I'm now rebooting the machine with a new kernel, where I just changed
	if (unlikely(d_in_lookup(dentry)))
to
	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(d_in_lookup(dentry)))
in order to see if this really triggered.

Anyway, I think your patch is good so far.
Would that be the final patch, or should I test some others?

Thanks!
Helge

>
> --- a/fs/dcache.c
> +++ b/fs/dcache.c
> @@ -605,8 +605,12 @@ static void __dentry_kill(struct dentry
>  		spin_unlock(&parent->d_lock);
>  	if (dentry->d_inode)
>  		dentry_unlink_inode(dentry);
> -	else
> +	else {
> +		if (unlikely(d_in_lookup(dentry))) {
> +			__d_lookup_done(dentry);
> +		}
>  		spin_unlock(&dentry->d_lock);
> +	}
>  	this_cpu_dec(nr_dentry);
>  	if (dentry->d_op && dentry->d_op->d_release)
>  		dentry->d_op->d_release(dentry);