[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <afd5902a-3e79-a6d9-fcd7-abee276c5504@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2022 19:06:40 +0800
From: Xiubo Li <xiubli@...hat.com>
To: Luís Henriques <lhenriques@...e.de>
Cc: Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@...il.com>,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>, ceph-devel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ceph: fix memory leak in mount error path when using
test_dummy_encryption
On 07/11/2022 18:23, Luís Henriques wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 07, 2022 at 03:47:23PM +0800, Xiubo Li wrote:
>> On 03/11/2022 23:36, Luís Henriques wrote:
>>> Because ceph_init_fs_context() will never be invoced in case we get a
>>> mount error, destroy_mount_options() won't be releasing fscrypt resources
>>> with fscrypt_free_dummy_policy(). This will result in a memory leak. Add
>>> an invocation to this function in the mount error path.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Luís Henriques <lhenriques@...e.de>
>>> ---
>>> fs/ceph/super.c | 1 +
>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/fs/ceph/super.c b/fs/ceph/super.c
>>> index 2224d44d21c0..6b9fd04b25cd 100644
>>> --- a/fs/ceph/super.c
>>> +++ b/fs/ceph/super.c
>>> @@ -1362,6 +1362,7 @@ static int ceph_get_tree(struct fs_context *fc)
>>> ceph_mdsc_close_sessions(fsc->mdsc);
>>> deactivate_locked_super(sb);
>>> + fscrypt_free_dummy_policy(&fsc->fsc_dummy_enc_policy);
>> Hi Luis,
>>
>> BTW, any reason the following code won't be triggered ?
>>
>> deactivate_locked_super(sb);
>>
>> --> fs->kill_sb(s);
>>
>> --> ceph_kill_sb()
>>
>> --> kill_anon_super()
>>
>> --> generic_shutdown_super()
>>
>> --> sop->put_super()
>>
>> --> ceph_put_super()
>>
>> --> ceph_fscrypt_free_dummy_policy()
>>
>> --> fscrypt_free_dummy_policy(
>>
> Here's what I'm seeing here:
>
> sys_mount->path_mount->do_new_mount->vfs_get_tree->ceph_get_tree
>
> ceph_get_tree() fails due to ceph_real_mount() returning an error. My
> understanding is that that, since fc->root is never set, that code path
> will never be triggered. Does that make sense?
Okay, you are right!
How about fixing it in ceph_real_mount() instead ?
>
> An easy way to reproduce is by running fstest ceph/005 with the
> 'test_dummy_encryption' option. (I'll probably need to send a patch to
> disable this test when this option is present.)
Anyway this should be fixed in kceph.
Thanks!
- Xiubo
>
> Cheers,
> --
> Luís
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists