linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] kernfs: add kernfs_ops.free operation to free resources tied to the file

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: <20230627-ausgaben-brauhaus-a33e292558d8@brauner>
Date:   Tue, 27 Jun 2023 19:30:26 +0200
From:   Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>
To:     Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
Cc:     Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
        peterz@...radead.org, lujialin4@...wei.com,
        lizefan.x@...edance.com, hannes@...xchg.org, mingo@...hat.com,
        ebiggers@...nel.org, oleg@...hat.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, juri.lelli@...hat.com,
        vincent.guittot@...aro.org, dietmar.eggemann@....com,
        rostedt@...dmis.org, bsegall@...gle.com, mgorman@...e.de,
        bristot@...hat.com, vschneid@...hat.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...roid.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] kernfs: add kernfs_ops.free operation to free
 resources tied to the file

On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 10:09:27AM -0700, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 1:24 AM Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 10:31:49AM -1000, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 01:17:12PM -0700, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > > > diff --git a/include/linux/kernfs.h b/include/linux/kernfs.h
> > > > index 73f5c120def8..a7e404ff31bb 100644
> > > > --- a/include/linux/kernfs.h
> > > > +++ b/include/linux/kernfs.h
> > > > @@ -273,6 +273,11 @@ struct kernfs_ops {
> > > >      */
> > > >     int (*open)(struct kernfs_open_file *of);
> > > >     void (*release)(struct kernfs_open_file *of);
> > > > +   /*
> > > > +    * Free resources tied to the lifecycle of the file, like a
> > > > +    * waitqueue used for polling.
> > > > +    */
> > > > +   void (*free)(struct kernfs_open_file *of);
> > >
> > > I think this can use a bit more commenting - ie. explain that release may be
> > > called earlier than the actual freeing of the file and how that can lead to
> > > problems. Othre than that, looks fine to me.
> >
> > It seems the more natural thing to do would be to introduce a ->drain()
> > operation and order it before ->release(), no?
> 
> I assume you mean we should add a ->drain() operation and call it when
> kernfs_drain_open_files()  causes kernfs_release_file()? That would
> work but if any existing release() handler counts on the current
> behavior (release() being called while draining) then we should find
> and fix these. Hopefully they don't really depend on the current
> behavior but I dunno.

Before I wrote that I did a naive

        > git grep -A 20 kernfs_ops | grep \\.release
        kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c- .release                = cgroup_file_release,
        kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c- .release                = cgroup_file_release,

which only gave cgroup_release_file(). Might be I'm missing some convoluted
callchains though or macro magic...

->release() was added in

    commit 0e67db2f9fe91937e798e3d7d22c50a8438187e1
    kernfs: add kernfs_ops->open/release() callbacks

    Add ->open/release() methods to kernfs_ops.  ->open() is called when
    the file is opened and ->release() when the file is either released or
    severed.  These callbacks can be used, for example, to manage
    persistent caching objects over multiple seq_file iterations.

    Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
    Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
    Acked-by: Acked-by: Zefan Li <lizefan@...wei.com>


which mentions "either releases or severed" which imho already points to
separate methods.