[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230915143343.GM800259@ZenIV>
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2023 15:33:43 +0100
From: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
To: Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>,
Vasily Gorbik <gor@...ux.ibm.com>,
Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@...ux.ibm.com>,
Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@...el.com>,
Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>,
Dennis Dalessandro <dennis.dalessandro@...nelisnetworks.com>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@...merspace.com>,
Anna Schumaker <anna@...nel.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@...nel.org>,
Naohiro Aota <naohiro.aota@....com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org,
cgroups@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/19] fs: release anon dev_t in deactivate_locked_super
On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 03:28:14PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 04:12:07PM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote:
> > + static void some_fs_kill_sb(struct super_block *sb)
> > + {
> > + struct some_fs_info *info = sb->s_fs_info;
> > +
> > + kill_*_super(sb);
> > + kfree(info);
> > + }
> > +
> > +It's best practice to never deviate from this pattern.
>
> The last part is flat-out incorrect. If e.g. fatfs or cifs ever switches
> to that pattern, you'll get UAF - they need freeing of ->s_fs_info
> of anything that ever had been mounted done with RCU delay; moreover,
> unload_nls() in fatfs needs to be behind the same.
>
> Lifetime rules for fs-private parts of superblock are really private to
> filesystem; their use by sget/sget_fc callbacks might impose restrictions
> on those, but that again is none of the VFS business.
PS: and no, we don't want to impose such RCU delay on every filesystem
out there; what's more, there's nothing to prohibit e.g. having ->s_fs_info
pointing to a refcounted fs-private object (possibly shared by various
superblocks), so freeing might very well be "drop the reference and destroy
if refcount has reached 0".
Powered by blists - more mailing lists