On Fri, Nov 11, 2022 at 5:37 PM Jiachen Zhang
<zhangjiachen.jaycee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> The FUSE_READDIRPLUS request reply handler fuse_direntplus_link() might
> call fuse_iget() to initialize a new fuse_inode and change its attributes.
> But as the new fi->attr_version is always initialized with 0, even if the
> attr_version of the FUSE_READDIRPLUS request has become staled, staled attr
> may still be set to the new fuse_inode. This may cause file size
> inconsistency even when a filesystem backend is mounted with a single FUSE
> mountpoint.
>
> This commit fixes the issue by initializing new fuse_inode attr_versions by
> the global fc->attr_version. This may introduce more FUSE_GETATTR but can
> avoid weird attributes rollback being seen by users.
>
> Fixes: 19332138887c ("fuse: initialize attr_version of new fuse inodes by fc->attr_version")
Ping..., and the Fixes tag should be:
Fixes: fbee36b92abc ("fuse: fix uninitialized field in fuse_inode")
Best regards,
Jiachen
> Signed-off-by: Jiachen Zhang <zhangjiachen.jaycee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/fuse/inode.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/fuse/inode.c b/fs/fuse/inode.c
> index 6b3beda16c1b..145ded6b55af 100644
> --- a/fs/fuse/inode.c
> +++ b/fs/fuse/inode.c
> @@ -71,6 +71,7 @@ struct fuse_forget_link *fuse_alloc_forget(void)
> static struct inode *fuse_alloc_inode(struct super_block *sb)
> {
> struct fuse_inode *fi;
> + struct fuse_conn *fc = get_fuse_conn_super(sb);
>
> fi = alloc_inode_sb(sb, fuse_inode_cachep, GFP_KERNEL);
> if (!fi)
> @@ -80,7 +81,7 @@ static struct inode *fuse_alloc_inode(struct super_block *sb)
> fi->inval_mask = 0;
> fi->nodeid = 0;
> fi->nlookup = 0;
> - fi->attr_version = 0;
> + fi->attr_version = fuse_get_attr_version(fc);
> fi->orig_ino = 0;
> fi->state = 0;
> mutex_init(&fi->mutex);
> --
> 2.20.1
>
