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: <062f7b08f6dd4354877c24ea72e6d430@exch01.asrmicro.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2024 09:55:25 +0000
From: Lv Fei(吕飞) <feilv@...micro.com>
To: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com>
CC: "miklos@...redi.hu" <miklos@...redi.hu>,
        "linux-unionfs@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-unionfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Xu Lianghu(徐良虎) <lianghuxu@...micro.com>
Subject: 答复: [PATCH] ovl: fsync after metadata copy-up via mount option "upsync=strict"


> 
> -----邮件原件-----
> 发件人: Amir Goldstein [mailto:amir73il@...il.com] 
> 发送时间: 2024年7月19日 15:24
> 收件人: Lv Fei(吕飞) <feilv@...micro.com>
> 抄送: miklos@...redi.hu; linux-unionfs@...r.kernel.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; Xu Lianghu(徐良虎) > <lianghuxu@...micro.com>
> 主题: Re: [PATCH] ovl: fsync after metadata copy-up via mount option "upsync=strict"
> 
> On Thu, Jul 18, 2024 at 6:43 AM Fei Lv <feilv@...micro.com> wrote:
> >
> > If a directory only exist in low layer, create a new file in it 
> > trigger directory copy-up. Permission lost of the new directory in 
> > upper layer was observed during power-cut stress test.
> 
> You should specify that this outcome happens on very specific upper fs (i.e. ubifs) which does not enforce ordering on storing of metadata changes.

OK.

> 
> >
> > Fix by adding new mount opion "upsync=strict", make sure data/metadata 
> > of copied up directory written to disk before renaming from tmp to 
> > final destination.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Fei Lv <feilv@...micro.com>
> > ---
> > OPT_sync changed to OPT_upsync since mount option "sync" already used.
> 
> I see. I don't like the name "upsync" so much, it has other meanings how about using the option "fsync"?

OK.

> 
> Here is a suggested documentation (which should be accompanied to any patch)

OK.

> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/filesystems/overlayfs.rst
> b/Documentation/filesystems/overlayfs.rst
> index 165514401441..f8183ddf8c4d 100644
> --- a/Documentation/filesystems/overlayfs.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/filesystems/overlayfs.rst
> @@ -742,6 +742,42 @@ controlled by the "uuid" mount option, which supports these values:
>      mounted with "uuid=on".
> 
> 
> +Durability and copy up
> +----------------------
> +
> +The fsync(2) and fdatasync(2) system calls ensure that the metadata and 
> +data of a file, respectively, are safely written to the backing 
> +storage, which is expected to guarantee the existence of the information post system crash.
> +
> +Without the fdatasync(2) call, there is no guarantee that the observed 
> +data after a system crash will be either the old or the new data, but 
> +in practice, the observed data after crash is often the old or new data or a mix of both.
> +
> +When overlayfs file is modified for the first time, copy up will create 
> +a copy of the lower file and its parent directories in the upper layer.  
> +In case of a system crash, if fdatasync(2) was not called after the 
> +modification, the upper file could end up with no data at all (i.e. 
> +zeros), which would be an unusual outcome.  To avoid this experience, 
> +overlayfs calls fsync(2) on the upper file before completing the copy up with rename(2) to make the copy > up "atomic".
> +
> +Depending on the backing filesystem (e.g. ubifs), fsync(2) before 
> +rename(2) may not be enough to provide the "atomic" copy up behavior 
> +and fsync(2) on the copied up parent directories is required as well.
> +
> +Overlayfs can be tuned to prefer performance or durability when storing 
> +to the underlying upper layer.  This is controlled by the "fsync" mount 
> +option, which supports these values:
> +
> +- "ordered": (default)
> +    Call fsync(2) on upper file before completion of copy up.
> +- "strict":
> +    Call fsync(2) on upper file and directories before completion of copy up.
> +- "volatile": [*]
> +    Prefer performance over durability (see `Volatile mount`_)
> +
> +[*] The mount option "volatile" is an alias to "fsync=volatile".
> +
> +
>  Volatile mount
>  --------------
> 
> >
> >  fs/overlayfs/copy_up.c   | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
> >  fs/overlayfs/ovl_entry.h | 20 ++++++++++++++++++--
> >  fs/overlayfs/params.c    | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> >  fs/overlayfs/super.c     |  2 +-
> >  4 files changed, 69 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/overlayfs/copy_up.c b/fs/overlayfs/copy_up.c index 
> > a5ef2005a2cc..b6f021ad7a43 100644
> > --- a/fs/overlayfs/copy_up.c
> > +++ b/fs/overlayfs/copy_up.c
> > @@ -243,6 +243,21 @@ static int ovl_verify_area(loff_t pos, loff_t pos2, loff_t len, loff_t totlen)
> >         return 0;
> >  }
> >
> > +static int ovl_copy_up_sync(struct path *path) {
> > +       struct file *new_file;
> > +       int err;
> > +
> > +       new_file = ovl_path_open(path, O_LARGEFILE | O_WRONLY);
> 
> I don't think any of those O_ flags are needed for fsync.
> Can a directory be opened O_WRONLY???

This function may be called with file or directory, shall I need to use different
flags? Such as below:

static int ovl_copy_up_sync(struct path *path, bool is_dir)
{
	struct file *new_file;
	int flags;
        int err;

        flags = is_dir ? (O_RDONLY | O_DIRECTORY) : (O_LARGEFILE | O_WRONLY);
	new_file = ovl_path_open(path, flags);
	if (IS_ERR(new_file))
		return PTR_ERR(new_file);

	err = vfs_fsync(new_file, 0);
	fput(new_file);

	return err;
}

> 
> > +       if (IS_ERR(new_file))
> > +               return PTR_ERR(new_file);
> > +
> > +       err = vfs_fsync(new_file, 0);
> > +       fput(new_file);
> > +
> > +       return err;
> > +}
> > +
> >  static int ovl_copy_up_file(struct ovl_fs *ofs, struct dentry *dentry,
> >                             struct file *new_file, loff_t len)  { @@ 
> > -701,6 +716,9 @@ static int ovl_copy_up_metadata(struct ovl_copy_up_ctx *c, struct dentry *temp)
> >                 err = ovl_set_attr(ofs, temp, &c->stat);
> >         inode_unlock(temp->d_inode);
> >
> > +       if (!err && ovl_should_sync_strict(ofs))
> > +               err = ovl_copy_up_sync(&upperpath);
> > +
> >         return err;
> >  }
> >
> > @@ -1104,6 +1122,9 @@ static int ovl_copy_up_meta_inode_data(struct ovl_copy_up_ctx *c)
> >         ovl_clear_flag(OVL_HAS_DIGEST, d_inode(c->dentry));
> >         ovl_clear_flag(OVL_VERIFIED_DIGEST, d_inode(c->dentry));
> >         ovl_set_upperdata(d_inode(c->dentry));
> > +
> > +       if (!err && ovl_should_sync_strict(ofs))
> > +               err = ovl_copy_up_sync(&upperpath);
> 
> fsync was probably already called in ovl_copy_up_file() making this call redundant and fsync of the removal > of metacopy xattr does not add any safety.

My original idea was that ovl_should_sync and ovl_should_sync_strict should not be enabled at the same time. The reasons are as follows:
If bothe ovl_should_sync and ovl_should_sync_strict return ture for "fsync=strict",
and power cut between ovl_copy_up_file and ovl_copy_up_metadata for file copy-up,
seems this file may also lost permission? 

> 
> >  out_free:
> >         kfree(capability);
> >  out:
> > diff --git a/fs/overlayfs/ovl_entry.h b/fs/overlayfs/ovl_entry.h index 
> > cb449ab310a7..4592e6f7dcf7 100644
> > --- a/fs/overlayfs/ovl_entry.h
> > +++ b/fs/overlayfs/ovl_entry.h
> > @@ -5,6 +5,12 @@
> >   * Copyright (C) 2016 Red Hat, Inc.
> >   */
> >
> > +enum {
> > +       OVL_SYNC_DATA,
> > +       OVL_SYNC_STRICT,
> > +       OVL_SYNC_OFF,
> > +};
> > +
> >  struct ovl_config {
> >         char *upperdir;
> >         char *workdir;
> > @@ -18,7 +24,7 @@ struct ovl_config {
> >         int xino;
> >         bool metacopy;
> >         bool userxattr;
> > -       bool ovl_volatile;
> > +       int sync_mode;
> >  };
> >
> >  struct ovl_sb {
> > @@ -120,7 +126,17 @@ static inline struct ovl_fs *OVL_FS(struct 
> > super_block *sb)
> >
> >  static inline bool ovl_should_sync(struct ovl_fs *ofs)  {
> > -       return !ofs->config.ovl_volatile;
> > +       return ofs->config.sync_mode == OVL_SYNC_DATA;
> 
>     return ofs->config.sync_mode != OVL_SYNC_OFF; or
>     return ofs->config.sync_mode != OVL_FSYNC_VOLATILE;

There are risks if ovl_should_sync and ovl_should_sync_strict enabled at the same time.
The reasons are above.

> 
> > +}
> > +
> > +static inline bool ovl_should_sync_strict(struct ovl_fs *ofs) {
> > +       return ofs->config.sync_mode == OVL_SYNC_STRICT; }
> > +
> > +static inline bool ovl_is_volatile(struct ovl_config *config) {
> > +       return config->sync_mode == OVL_SYNC_OFF;
> >  }
> >
> >  static inline unsigned int ovl_numlower(struct ovl_entry *oe) diff 
> > --git a/fs/overlayfs/params.c b/fs/overlayfs/params.c index 
> > 4860fcc4611b..5d5538dd3de7 100644
> > --- a/fs/overlayfs/params.c
> > +++ b/fs/overlayfs/params.c
> > @@ -58,6 +58,7 @@ enum ovl_opt {
> >         Opt_xino,
> >         Opt_metacopy,
> >         Opt_verity,
> > +       Opt_upsync,
> >         Opt_volatile,
> >  };
> >
> > @@ -139,6 +140,23 @@ static int ovl_verity_mode_def(void)
> >         return OVL_VERITY_OFF;
> >  }
> >
> > +static const struct constant_table ovl_parameter_upsync[] = {
> > +       { "data",       OVL_SYNC_DATA      },
> > +       { "strict",     OVL_SYNC_STRICT    },
> > +       { "off",        OVL_SYNC_OFF       },
> > +       {}
> > +};
> > +
> > +static const char *ovl_upsync_mode(struct ovl_config *config) {
> > +       return ovl_parameter_upsync[config->sync_mode].name;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int ovl_upsync_mode_def(void)
> > +{
> > +       return OVL_SYNC_DATA;
> > +}
> > +
> >  const struct fs_parameter_spec ovl_parameter_spec[] = {
> >         fsparam_string_empty("lowerdir",    Opt_lowerdir),
> >         fsparam_string("lowerdir+",         Opt_lowerdir_add),
> > @@ -154,6 +172,7 @@ const struct fs_parameter_spec ovl_parameter_spec[] = {
> >         fsparam_enum("xino",                Opt_xino, ovl_parameter_xino),
> >         fsparam_enum("metacopy",            Opt_metacopy, ovl_parameter_bool),
> >         fsparam_enum("verity",              Opt_verity, ovl_parameter_verity),
> > +       fsparam_enum("upsync",              Opt_upsync, ovl_parameter_upsync),
> >         fsparam_flag("volatile",            Opt_volatile),
> >         {}
> >  };
> > @@ -617,8 +636,11 @@ static int ovl_parse_param(struct fs_context *fc, struct fs_parameter *param)
> >         case Opt_verity:
> >                 config->verity_mode = result.uint_32;
> >                 break;
> > +       case Opt_upsync:
> > +               config->sync_mode = result.uint_32;
> > +               break;
> >         case Opt_volatile:
> > -               config->ovl_volatile = true;
> > +               config->sync_mode = OVL_SYNC_OFF;
> >                 break;
> >         case Opt_userxattr:
> >                 config->userxattr = true; @@ -802,9 +824,9 @@ int 
> > ovl_fs_params_verify(const struct ovl_fs_context *ctx,
> >                 config->index = false;
> >         }
> >
> > -       if (!config->upperdir && config->ovl_volatile) {
> > +       if (!config->upperdir && ovl_is_volatile(config)) {
> >                 pr_info("option \"volatile\" is meaningless in a 
> > non-upper mount, ignoring it.\n");
> 
> This message would be confusing if mount option is "syncup=off"
> but if the option is "fsync=volatile" I think the message can stay as it is.
> 
> Thanks,
> Amir.

Yes. That sounds good! 
We thought this place was a little weird, too...

> 
> > -               config->ovl_volatile = false;
> > +               config->sync_mode = ovl_upsync_mode_def();
> >         }
> >
> >         if (!config->upperdir && config->uuid == OVL_UUID_ON) { @@ 
> > -997,8 +1019,11 @@ int ovl_show_options(struct seq_file *m, struct dentry *dentry)
> >         if (ofs->config.metacopy != ovl_metacopy_def)
> >                 seq_printf(m, ",metacopy=%s",
> >                            ofs->config.metacopy ? "on" : "off");
> > -       if (ofs->config.ovl_volatile)
> > +       if (ovl_is_volatile(&ofs->config))
> >                 seq_puts(m, ",volatile");
> > +       else if (ofs->config.sync_mode != ovl_upsync_mode_def())
> > +               seq_printf(m, ",upsync=%s",
> > +                          ovl_upsync_mode(&ofs->config));
> >         if (ofs->config.userxattr)
> >                 seq_puts(m, ",userxattr");
> >         if (ofs->config.verity_mode != ovl_verity_mode_def()) diff 
> > --git a/fs/overlayfs/super.c b/fs/overlayfs/super.c index 
> > 06a231970cb5..824cbcf40523 100644
> > --- a/fs/overlayfs/super.c
> > +++ b/fs/overlayfs/super.c
> > @@ -750,7 +750,7 @@ static int ovl_make_workdir(struct super_block *sb, struct ovl_fs *ofs,
> >          * For volatile mount, create a incompat/volatile/dirty file to keep
> >          * track of it.
> >          */
> > -       if (ofs->config.ovl_volatile) {
> > +       if (ovl_is_volatile(&ofs->config)) {
> >                 err = ovl_create_volatile_dirty(ofs);
> >                 if (err < 0) {
> >                         pr_err("Failed to create volatile/dirty 
> > file.\n");
> >
> > base-commit: 0c3836482481200ead7b416ca80c68a29cfdaabd
> > --
> > 2.45.2
> >

Thanks,
Fei

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ