On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 11:42:07PM +0000, Al Viro wrote: > On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 03:11:13PM -0800, Daniel Rosenberg wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 6:12 PM Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 07, 2020 at 05:35:46PM -0800, Daniel Rosenberg wrote: > > > > > > > > > Again, is that safe in case when the contents of the string str points to > > > keeps changing under you? > > > > I'm not sure what you mean. I thought it was safe to use the str and > > len passed into d_compare. Even if it gets changed under RCU > > conditions I thought there was some code to ensure that the name/len > > pair passed in is consistent, and any other inconsistencies would get > > caught by d_seq later. Are there unsafe code paths that can follow? > > If you ever fetch the same byte twice, you might see different values. > You need a fairly careful use of READ_ONCE() or equivalents to make > sure that you don't get screwed over by that. > > Sure, ->d_seq mismatch will throw the result out, but you need to make > sure you won't oops/step on uninitialized memory/etc. in process. > > It's not impossible to get right, but it's not trivial and you need all > code working with that much more careful than normal for string handling. It looks like this is a real problem, not just a "theoretical" data race. For example, see: utf8ncursor(): /* The first byte of s may not be an utf8 continuation. */ if (len > 0 && (*s & 0xC0) == 0x80) return -1; and then utf8byte(): } else if ((*u8c->s & 0xC0) == 0x80) { /* This is a continuation of the current character. */ if (!u8c->p) u8c->len--; return (unsigned char)*u8c->s++; The first byte of the string is checked in two different functions, so it's very likely to be loaded twice. In between, it could change from a non-continuation byte to a continuation byte. That would cause the string length to be decremented from 0 to UINT_MAX. Then utf8_strncasecmp() would run beyond the bounds of the string until something happened to mismatch. That's just an example that I found right away; there are probably more. IMO, this needs to be fixed before anyone can actually use the ext4 and f2fs casefolding stuff. I don't know the best solution. One option is to fix fs/unicode/ to handle concurrently modified strings. Another could be to see what it would take to serialize lookups and renames for casefolded directories... - Eric ______________________________________________________ Linux MTD discussion mailing list http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/