On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 10:20:43PM +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 5:00 PM, Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 12:54:14PM +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> >> On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 10:38 PM, Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> > If a dentry has copy up origin, we set flag OVL_PATH_ORIGIN. So far
> >> > this decision was easy that we had to check only for oe->numlower
> >> > and if it is non-zero, we knew there is copy up origin. (For non-dir
> >> > we installed origin dentry in lowerstack[0]).
> >> >
> >> > But we don't create ORGIN xattr for broken hardlinks (index=off). And
> >> > with metacopy feature it is possible that we will still install
> >> > lowerstack[0]. But that's lower data dentry of metacopy upper of broken
> >> > hardlink and not ORIGIN XATTR is not set.
> >> >
> >> > So two differentiate between two cases, do not set OVL_PATH_ORIGIN if
> >> > we have a broken hardlink.
> >> >
> >> > Signed-off-by: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> > ---
> >> > fs/overlayfs/util.c | 9 ++++++++-
> >> > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >> >
> >> > diff --git a/fs/overlayfs/util.c b/fs/overlayfs/util.c
> >> > index 29f7336ade88..961d65bd25c9 100644
> >> > --- a/fs/overlayfs/util.c
> >> > +++ b/fs/overlayfs/util.c
> >> > @@ -117,7 +117,14 @@ enum ovl_path_type ovl_path_type(struct dentry *dentry)
> >> > * Non-dir dentry can hold lower dentry of its copy up origin.
> >>
> >> This comment needs updating with metacopy.
> >>
> >> > */
> >> > if (oe->numlower) {
> >> > - type |= __OVL_PATH_ORIGIN;
> >> > + /*
> >> > + * ORIGIN is created for everyting except broken
> >> > + * hardlinks
> >> > + */
> >> > + if (!(d_inode(dentry)->i_nlink > 1 &&
> >> > + !ovl_test_flag(OVL_INDEX, d_inode(dentry))))
> >> > + type |= __OVL_PATH_ORIGIN;
> >> > +
> >>
> >> I don't like relying on overlay nlink. it is not reliable.
> >> And I think you missed the directory case.
> >
> > Directory should be fine because for directories ->i_nlink == 1 and this
> > condition will become true.
> >
> >> The information you need was available during lookup
> >> and we did not keep it (was lower verified by origin fh).
> >> Most likely what we need to do it store OVL_ORIGIN inode flag
> >> during lookup and then use ovl_test_flag(OVL_ORIGIN)
> >> in place of OVL_TYPE_ORIGIN(type).
> >>
> >> If I am not mistaken, you could set flag OVL_ORIGIN in
> >> ovl_get_inode() IFF (upperdentry && bylower), but to be honest
> >> the rules became so complicated that I can't say for sure.
> >> At least I concentrated all the rules in one helper ovl_hash_bylower(),
> >> so I hope that helps.
> >
> > Ok, I can put another ovl-inode flag say OVL_ORIGIN. But that also means
> > that I need to set the flag during copy up. And that means it brings
> > back ordering requirements for lockless access. For example, in
> > ovl_getattr(), if we replace OVL_TYPE_ORIGIN() with ovl_test_flag(ORIGIN),
> > without explicit barriers, what's the guarantee a user will see OVL_ORIGIN
> > flag yet. In fact it can happen that user might see upperdentry but not
> > OVL_ORIGIN.
>
> OK, so instead set OVL_BYLOWER in ovl_get_inode() IFF (bylower).
> that property doesn't change on copy up.
> and set __OVL_PATH_ORIGIN in ovl_path_type() if upper AND numlower
> AND OVL_BYLOWER.
Ok, so at the time of lookup, we know if hardlink will be broken or
not and that property does not change over copy up. So yes that should
solve the issue.
Having said that, OVL_BYLOWER is very broad in my opinion. Setting
OVL_ORIGIN in inode appeals more to me. This means this inode either
has copy up origin or will have copy up origin when copy up
happens.
What do you think?
I have another proposal. All these problems seem to stem from the
fact that copy up changes some of the fields in ovl_inode and we
don't have any strict ordering for the updates.
I am wondering can we replace data dependency barrier
(smp_read_barrier_depends) with a full smp_read() and use that
for ovl_dentry_upper(). And do all the flag updates before
ovl_inode_update(). This should make sure that if caller sees
upperdentry, then not only upper dentry is table, at the same
time any updates to OVL_INDEX, OVL_ORIGIN and any other flags
have been done.
So in copy up path, we will first update OVL_INDEX, OVL_ORIGIN etc
and then call ovl_inode_update(). And on read side fetch upperdentry
first and put smp_rmb() after that. And if upperdentry is visible,
that means INDEX and ORIGIN update must be visible as well.
Copy up side
-----------
store OVL_INDEX
store OVL_ORIGIN
store any other relevant flag
smp_wmb()
store ovl_inode->__upperdentry
Read side (ovl_getxattr and other users)
-----------------------------------------
load ovl_inode->__upperdentry
smp_rmb()
load OVL_INDEX
load OVL_ORIGIN
Now if ovl_inode->__upperdentry is set, that means not only upper dentry
is stable, it should also mean that ovl_inode->flags are stable too.
If this theory of barrier operations is correct, I feel this is a better
solution. It is easy to understand at the same time it allows for
easy code extension in future.
Right now, these lockless assumptions are so difficult to understand
and so error prone, that all the new users will invariably end up
introducing races.
>
> >
> > In fact I see OVL_INDEX being used in ovl_getattr(). If a parallel copy
> > up took place it is possible that ovl_getattr() saw upperdentry but not
> > the OVL_INDEX. And then nlink count will be off. IOW, what barrier/lock
> > guarantees that this does not happen.
> >
>
> Yes. and that is not the only problem I see with ovl_getattr().
>
> stat->dev could be set to ovl_get_pseudo_dev(dentry), even
> if stat->ino is not set to lowerstat.ino; that is not good.
>
> If I am not mistaken, all the special conditions in ovl_getattr()
> to use lower st_ino are already encoded in ovl_hash_bylower(),
> so you may completely remove those extra tests if
> OVL_TYPE_ORIGIN(type) already checks the OVL_BYLOWER
> flag.
>
> It may be hard to see my claim above is true, because, for
> example, sb->s_export_op in ovl_hash_bylower() is equivalent
> to ovl_verify_lower(dentry->d_sb) in ovl_getattr().
>
> Please double check my claims, and if you agree, you can submit a
> patch that Fixes: ("a0c5ad307ac0 ovl: relax same fs constraint for
> constant st_ino"), which already does the right thing for metacopy.
I will need to spend some time to better understand it. I feel that
changing barrier semantics around __upperdentry, will solve this
issue with existing code as well.
Vivek
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-unionfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
