4.2.8-ckt7 -stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
---8<------------------------------------------------------------
From: Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx>
commit 614a4e3773148a31f58dc174bbf578ceb63510c2 upstream.
locked_inode_to_wb_and_lock_list() wb_get()'s the wb associated with
the target inode, unlocks inode, locks the wb's list_lock and verifies
that the inode is still associated with the wb. To prevent the wb
going away between dropping inode lock and acquiring list_lock, the wb
is pinned while inode lock is held. The wb reference is put right
after acquiring list_lock citing that the wb won't be dereferenced
anymore.
This isn't true. If the inode is still associated with the wb, the
inode has reference and it's safe to return the wb; however, if inode
has been switched, the wb still needs to be unlocked which is a
dereference and can lead to use-after-free if it it races with wb
destruction.
Fix it by putting the reference after releasing list_lock.
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx>
Fixes: 87e1d789bf55 ("writeback: implement [locked_]inode_to_wb_and_lock_list()")
Tested-by: Tahsin Erdogan <tahsin@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Kamal Mostafa <kamal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
fs/fs-writeback.c | 8 +++++---
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/fs-writeback.c b/fs/fs-writeback.c
index 5fa588e..5760ea9 100644
--- a/fs/fs-writeback.c
+++ b/fs/fs-writeback.c
@@ -283,13 +283,15 @@ locked_inode_to_wb_and_lock_list(struct inode *inode)
wb_get(wb);
spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock);
spin_lock(&wb->list_lock);
- wb_put(wb); /* not gonna deref it anymore */
/* i_wb may have changed inbetween, can't use inode_to_wb() */
- if (likely(wb == inode->i_wb))
- return wb; /* @inode already has ref */
+ if (likely(wb == inode->i_wb)) {
+ wb_put(wb); /* @inode already has ref */
+ return wb;
+ }
spin_unlock(&wb->list_lock);
+ wb_put(wb);
cpu_relax();
spin_lock(&inode->i_lock);
}
--
2.7.4
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html