linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] btrfs: qgroup: fix sleep from invalid context bug in update_qgroup_limit

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: <8845454d-9942-8216-2f00-2bb12bad0e41@gmx.com>
Date:   Wed, 16 Nov 2022 06:50:22 +0800
From:   Qu Wenruo <quwenruo.btrfs@....com>
To:     ChenXiaoSong <chenxiaosong2@...wei.com>, clm@...com,
        josef@...icpanda.com, dsterba@...e.com
Cc:     linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        zhangxiaoxu5@...wei.com, yanaijie@...wei.com, wqu@...e.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] btrfs: qgroup: fix sleep from invalid context bug
 in update_qgroup_limit_item()



On 2022/11/16 01:17, ChenXiaoSong wrote:
> Syzkaller reported BUG as follows:
> 
>    BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at
>         include/linux/sched/mm.h:274
>    Call Trace:
>     <TASK>
>     dump_stack_lvl+0xcd/0x134
>     __might_resched.cold+0x222/0x26b
>     kmem_cache_alloc+0x2e7/0x3c0
>     update_qgroup_limit_item+0xe1/0x390
>     btrfs_qgroup_inherit+0x147b/0x1ee0
>     create_subvol+0x4eb/0x1710
>     btrfs_mksubvol+0xfe5/0x13f0
>     __btrfs_ioctl_snap_create+0x2b0/0x430
>     btrfs_ioctl_snap_create_v2+0x25a/0x520
>     btrfs_ioctl+0x2a1c/0x5ce0
>     __x64_sys_ioctl+0x193/0x200
>     do_syscall_64+0x35/0x80
> 
> Fix this by delaying the limit item updates until unlock the spin lock.
> 
> Signed-off-by: ChenXiaoSong <chenxiaosong2@...wei.com>
> ---
>   fs/btrfs/qgroup.c | 13 +++++++++----
>   1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c b/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c
> index ca609a70d067..f84507ca3b99 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/qgroup.c
> @@ -2867,6 +2867,8 @@ int btrfs_qgroup_inherit(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, u64 srcid,
>   	bool need_rescan = false;
>   	u32 level_size = 0;
>   	u64 nums;
> +	bool update_limit = false;
> +	int err;
>   
>   	/*
>   	 * There are only two callers of this function.
> @@ -2957,10 +2959,7 @@ int btrfs_qgroup_inherit(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, u64 srcid,
>   		dstgroup->max_excl = inherit->lim.max_excl;
>   		dstgroup->rsv_rfer = inherit->lim.rsv_rfer;
>   		dstgroup->rsv_excl = inherit->lim.rsv_excl;
> -
> -		ret = btrfs_update_quoto_limit(trans, dstgroup, fs_info);
> -		if (ret)
> -			goto unlock;
> +		update_limit = true;

Nope, just call qgroup_dirty() for @dstgroup.

Thanks,
Qu
>   	}
>   
>   	if (srcid) {
> @@ -2987,6 +2986,7 @@ int btrfs_qgroup_inherit(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, u64 srcid,
>   		dstgroup->max_excl = srcgroup->max_excl;
>   		dstgroup->rsv_rfer = srcgroup->rsv_rfer;
>   		dstgroup->rsv_excl = srcgroup->rsv_excl;
> +		update_limit = false;
>   
>   		qgroup_dirty(fs_info, dstgroup);
>   		qgroup_dirty(fs_info, srcgroup);
> @@ -3055,6 +3055,11 @@ int btrfs_qgroup_inherit(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans, u64 srcid,
>   
>   unlock:
>   	spin_unlock(&fs_info->qgroup_lock);
> +	if (update_limit) {
> +		err = btrfs_update_quoto_limit(trans, dstgroup, fs_info);
> +		if (err)
> +			ret = err;
> +	}
>   	if (!ret)
>   		ret = btrfs_sysfs_add_one_qgroup(fs_info, dstgroup);
>   out: