On Sun, Feb 5, 2017 at 10:01 PM, Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 05, 2017 at 09:15:24PM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
>
>> That case is fine. But nothing guarantees that fuse_abort_conn()
>> won't be called (in the non-deadlock case) when data is being copied
>> to the request args. Ending the request at such a point could easily
>> lead to use after free,
>
> So why not leave ending it to your fuse_dev_do_write()/fuse_dev_do_read()?
> See the reply I'd just sent (your mail arrived while I'd been writing that
> one - saw it only after I'd sent mine).
>
> Basically, what if we keep FR_LOCKED through *all* fuse_dev_do_{read,write}(),
> rather than dropping and regaining it many times and have fuse_abort_conn()
> skip request_end() on FR_LOCKED ones?
Then we can't break out of that deadlock: we wait until
fuse_dev_do_write() is done until calling request_end() which
ultimately results in unlocking page. But fuse_dev_do_write() won't
complete until the page is unlocked.
The only way out that I see is to have a refcount on all pages in
args. Which means copying everything not already in refcountable page
(i.e. args on stack) to a page array. It's definitely doable, but
needs time to sort out, and I'm definitely lacking that (overlayfs
currently trumps fuse).
Thanks,
Miklos
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
