It is very rare for get_next_ino() to return zero as a new inode number
since its type is unsigned int, but it can surely happen eventually.
Interestingly, ls(1) and find(1) (actually readdir(3)) don't show a file
whose inum is zero, so people won't be able to find it. This issue may
be harmful especially for tmpfs.
On a very long lived and busy system, users may frequently create files
on tmpfs. And if unluckily he gets inum=0, then he cannot see its
filename. If he remembers its name, he may be able to use or unlink it
by its name since the file surely exists. Otherwise, the file remains on
tmpfs silently. No one can touch it. This behaviour looks like resource
leak.
As a worse case, if a dir gets inum=0 and a user creates several files
under it, then the leaked memory will increase since a user cannot see
the name of all files under the dir whose inum=0, regardless the inum of
the children.
There is another unpleasant effect when get_next_ino() wraps
around. When there is a file whose inum=100 on tmpfs, a new file may get
inum=100, ie. the duplicated inums. I am not sure what will happen when
the duplicated inums exist on tmpfs. If it happens, then some tools
won't work correctly such as backup tools, I am afraid.
Anyway this is not a issue in get_next_ino(). It should be
fixed in mm/shmem.c separatly if it is really necessary.
There are many other get_next_ino() callers other than tmpfs, such as
several drivers, anon_inode, autofs4, freevxfs, procfs, pis, hugetlbfs,
configfs, ramfs, fuse, ocfs2, debugfs, securityfs, cgroup, socket, ipc.
Some of them will not care inum so this issue is harmless for them. But
the others may suffer from inum=0. For example, if procfs gets inum=0
for a task dir (or for one of its children), then several utilities
won't work correctly, including ps(1), lsof(8), etc.
(Essentially the patch is re-written by Eric Dumazet.)
Cc: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Hugh Dickins <hughd@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
Cc: Andreas Dilger <adilger@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: J. R. Okajima <hooanon05g@xxxxxxxxx>
---
fs/inode.c | 6 +++++-
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/inode.c b/fs/inode.c
index 567296b..58e7c56 100644
--- a/fs/inode.c
+++ b/fs/inode.c
@@ -840,6 +840,8 @@ unsigned int get_next_ino(void)
unsigned int *p = &get_cpu_var(last_ino);
unsigned int res = *p;
+start:
+
#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
if (unlikely((res & (LAST_INO_BATCH-1)) == 0)) {
static atomic_t shared_last_ino;
@@ -849,7 +851,9 @@ unsigned int get_next_ino(void)
}
#endif
- *p = ++res;
+ if (unlikely(!++res))
+ goto start; /* never zero */
+ *p = res;
put_cpu_var(last_ino);
WARN(!res, "static inum wrapped around");
return res;
--
1.7.10.4
--
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
