Re: [PATCH] fuse: fix possible deadlock if rings are never initialized

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





On 3/6/25 14:16, Luis Henriques wrote:
On Thu, Mar 06 2025, Bernd Schubert wrote:

On 3/6/25 12:12, Luis Henriques wrote:
When mounting a user-space filesystem using io_uring, the initialization
of the rings is done separately in the server side.  If for some reason
(e.g. a server bug) this step is not performed it will be impossible to
unmount the filesystem if there are already requests waiting.

This issue is easily reproduced with the libfuse passthrough_ll example,
if the queue depth is set to '0' and a request is queued before trying to
unmount the filesystem.  When trying to force the unmount, fuse_abort_conn()
will try to wake up all tasks waiting in fc->blocked_waitq, but because the
rings were never initialized, fuse_uring_ready() will never return 'true'.

Fixes: 3393ff964e0f ("fuse: block request allocation until io-uring init is complete")
Signed-off-by: Luis Henriques <luis@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
  fs/fuse/dev.c | 2 +-
  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/fs/fuse/dev.c b/fs/fuse/dev.c
index 7edceecedfa5..2fe565e9b403 100644
--- a/fs/fuse/dev.c
+++ b/fs/fuse/dev.c
@@ -77,7 +77,7 @@ void fuse_set_initialized(struct fuse_conn *fc)
  static bool fuse_block_alloc(struct fuse_conn *fc, bool for_background)
  {
  	return !fc->initialized || (for_background && fc->blocked) ||
-	       (fc->io_uring && !fuse_uring_ready(fc));
+	       (fc->io_uring && fc->connected && !fuse_uring_ready(fc));
  }
static void fuse_drop_waiting(struct fuse_conn *fc)


Oh yes, I had missed that.

Reviewed-by: Bernd Schubert <bschubert@xxxxxxx>

Thanks!  And... by the way, Bernd:

I know io_uring support in libfuse isn't ready yet, but I think there's
some error handling missing in your uring branch.  In particular, the
return of fuse_uring_start() is never checked, and thus if the rings
initialization fails, the server will not get any error.

I found that out because I blindly tried the patch below, and I was
surprised that the server was started just fine.

Thank you! I will work a bit on splitting the uring branch into merge-able patches later today, but probably won't finish today (too many other things to do).


Thanks,
Bernd




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [NTFS 3]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [NTFS 3]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]

  Powered by Linux