On Thu, 8 Aug 2013 17:24:43 +0200
Miklos Szeredi <miklos@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> From: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@xxxxxxx>
>
> We check submounts before doing d_drop() on a non-empty directory dentry in
> NFS (have_submounts()), but we do not exclude a racing mount. Nor do we
> prevent mounts to be added to the disconnected subtree using relative paths
> after the d_drop().
>
> This patch fixes these issues by checking for unlinked (unhashed, non-root)
> ancestors before proceeding with the mount. This is done after setting
> DCACHE_MOUNTED on the soon-to-be mountpoint and with the rename seqlock
> taken for write. This ensures that the only one of
> check_submounts_and_drop() or has_unlinked_ancestor() can succeed.
>
> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@xxxxxxx>
> CC: David Howells <dhowells@xxxxxxxxxx>
> CC: Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@xxxxxxxxxx>
> CC: Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@xxxxxxxxxx>
> CC: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/dcache.c | 35 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> fs/internal.h | 1 +
> fs/namespace.c | 9 +++++++++
> 3 files changed, 45 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/fs/dcache.c b/fs/dcache.c
> index 020004d..1333445 100644
> --- a/fs/dcache.c
> +++ b/fs/dcache.c
> @@ -1103,6 +1103,41 @@ rename_retry:
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(have_submounts);
>
> +static bool __has_unlinked_ancestor(struct dentry *dentry)
> +{
> + struct dentry *this;
> +
> + for (this = dentry; !IS_ROOT(this); this = this->d_parent) {
> + int is_unhashed;
> +
> + /* Need exclusion wrt. check_submounts_and_drop() */
> + spin_lock(&this->d_lock);
> + is_unhashed = d_unhashed(this);
> + spin_unlock(&this->d_lock);
> +
> + if (is_unhashed)
> + return true;
> + }
> + return false;
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * Called by mount code to check if the mountpoint is reachable (e.g. NFS can
> + * unhash a directory dentry and then the complete subtree can become
> + * unreachable).
> + */
> +bool has_unlinked_ancestor(struct dentry *dentry)
> +{
> + bool found;
> +
> + /* Need exclusion wrt. check_submounts_and_drop() */
> + write_seqlock(&rename_lock);
> + found = __has_unlinked_ancestor(dentry);
> + write_sequnlock(&rename_lock);
> +
> + return found;
> +}
> +
> /*
> * Search the dentry child list of the specified parent,
> * and move any unused dentries to the end of the unused
> diff --git a/fs/internal.h b/fs/internal.h
> index 7c5f01c..d232355 100644
> --- a/fs/internal.h
> +++ b/fs/internal.h
> @@ -126,6 +126,7 @@ extern int invalidate_inodes(struct super_block *, bool);
> * dcache.c
> */
> extern struct dentry *__d_alloc(struct super_block *, const struct qstr *);
> +extern bool has_unlinked_ancestor(struct dentry *dentry);
>
> /*
> * read_write.c
> diff --git a/fs/namespace.c b/fs/namespace.c
> index 7b1ca9b..bb92a9c 100644
> --- a/fs/namespace.c
> +++ b/fs/namespace.c
> @@ -634,6 +634,15 @@ static struct mountpoint *new_mountpoint(struct dentry *dentry)
> }
> dentry->d_flags |= DCACHE_MOUNTED;
> spin_unlock(&dentry->d_lock);
> +
> + if (has_unlinked_ancestor(dentry)) {
> + spin_lock(&dentry->d_lock);
> + dentry->d_flags &= ~DCACHE_MOUNTED;
> + spin_unlock(&dentry->d_lock);
> + kfree(mp);
> + return ERR_PTR(-ENOENT);
> + }
> +
> mp->m_dentry = dentry;
> mp->m_count = 1;
> list_add(&mp->m_hash, chain);
Looks reasonable. For posterity, it might be worth mentioning the
potential regression that you described earlier (racing with rename
from another host). That way if someone hits it in the future they
might be able to zero in on this change as the culprit more easily.
Acked-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
