> On Nov 7, 2022, at 09:12, Chuck Lever III <chuck.lever@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>
>> On Nov 7, 2022, at 5:48 AM, Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 2022-11-06 at 14:02 -0500, trondmy@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>>> From: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>> vfs_lock_file() expects the struct file_lock to be fully initialised by
>>> the caller. Re-exported NFSv3 has been seen to Oops if the fl_file field
>>> is NULL.
>>>
>>> Fixes: aec158242b87 ("lockd: set fl_owner when unlocking files")
>>> Signed-off-by: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> fs/lockd/svcsubs.c | 17 ++++++++++-------
>>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/fs/lockd/svcsubs.c b/fs/lockd/svcsubs.c
>>> index e1c4617de771..3515f17eaf3f 100644
>>> --- a/fs/lockd/svcsubs.c
>>> +++ b/fs/lockd/svcsubs.c
>>> @@ -176,7 +176,7 @@ nlm_delete_file(struct nlm_file *file)
>>> }
>>> }
>>>
>>> -static int nlm_unlock_files(struct nlm_file *file, fl_owner_t owner)
>>> +static int nlm_unlock_files(struct nlm_file *file, const struct file_lock *fl)
>>> {
>>> struct file_lock lock;
>>>
>>> @@ -184,12 +184,15 @@ static int nlm_unlock_files(struct nlm_file *file, fl_owner_t owner)
>>> lock.fl_type = F_UNLCK;
>>> lock.fl_start = 0;
>>> lock.fl_end = OFFSET_MAX;
>>> - lock.fl_owner = owner;
>>> - if (file->f_file[O_RDONLY] &&
>>> - vfs_lock_file(file->f_file[O_RDONLY], F_SETLK, &lock, NULL))
>>> + lock.fl_owner = fl->fl_owner;
>>> + lock.fl_pid = fl->fl_pid;
>>> + lock.fl_flags = FL_POSIX;
>>> +
>>> + lock.fl_file = file->f_file[O_RDONLY];
>>> + if (lock.fl_file && vfs_lock_file(lock.fl_file, F_SETLK, &lock, NULL))
>>> goto out_err;
>>> - if (file->f_file[O_WRONLY] &&
>>> - vfs_lock_file(file->f_file[O_WRONLY], F_SETLK, &lock, NULL))
>>> + lock.fl_file = file->f_file[O_WRONLY];
>>> + if (lock.fl_file && vfs_lock_file(lock.fl_file, F_SETLK, &lock, NULL))
>>> goto out_err;
>>> return 0;
>>> out_err:
>>> @@ -226,7 +229,7 @@ nlm_traverse_locks(struct nlm_host *host, struct nlm_file *file,
>>> if (match(lockhost, host)) {
>>>
>>> spin_unlock(&flctx->flc_lock);
>>> - if (nlm_unlock_files(file, fl->fl_owner))
>>> + if (nlm_unlock_files(file, fl))
>>> return 1;
>>> goto again;
>>> }
>>
>> Good catch.
>>
>> I wonder if we ought to roll an initializer function for file_locks to
>> make it harder for callers to miss setting some fields like this? One
>> idea: we could change vfs_lock_file to *not* take a file argument, and
>> insist that the caller fill out fl_file when calling it? That would make
>> it harder to screw this up.
>>
>> In any case, let's take this patch in the interim while we consider
>> whether and how to clean this up.
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Since this doesn't fix breakage in 6.1-rc, I plan to take it for 6.2.
> If all y'all feel the fix is more urgent than that, let me know.
It is relevant to fixing https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=216582
No idea how urgent that is...
_________________________________
Trond Myklebust
Linux NFS client maintainer, Hammerspace
trond.myklebust@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
