[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2020 15:26:38 +0100
From: Alexey Gladkov <gladkov.alexey@...il.com>
To: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Security Module <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@...il.com>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Daniel Micay <danielmicay@...il.com>,
Djalal Harouni <tixxdz@...il.com>,
"Dmitry V . Levin" <ldv@...linux.org>,
"Eric W . Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
"J . Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...chiereds.net>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 07/11] proc: flush task dcache entries from all procfs
instances
On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 10:45:53PM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 04:05:15PM +0100, Alexey Gladkov wrote:
> > This allows to flush dcache entries of a task on multiple procfs mounts
> > per pid namespace.
> >
> > The RCU lock is used because the number of reads at the task exit time
> > is much larger than the number of procfs mounts.
> >
> > Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
> > Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Djalal Harouni <tixxdz@...il.com>
> > Suggested-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Alexey Gladkov <gladkov.alexey@...il.com>
> > ---
> > fs/proc/base.c | 20 +++++++++++++++-----
> > fs/proc/root.c | 27 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> > include/linux/pid_namespace.h | 2 ++
> > include/linux/proc_fs.h | 2 ++
> > 4 files changed, 45 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/proc/base.c b/fs/proc/base.c
> > index 4ccb280a3e79..24b7c620ded3 100644
> > --- a/fs/proc/base.c
> > +++ b/fs/proc/base.c
> > @@ -3133,7 +3133,7 @@ static const struct inode_operations proc_tgid_base_inode_operations = {
> > .permission = proc_pid_permission,
> > };
> >
> > -static void proc_flush_task_mnt(struct vfsmount *mnt, pid_t pid, pid_t tgid)
> > +static void proc_flush_task_mnt_root(struct dentry *mnt_root, pid_t pid, pid_t tgid)
> > {
> > struct dentry *dentry, *leader, *dir;
> > char buf[10 + 1];
> > @@ -3142,7 +3142,7 @@ static void proc_flush_task_mnt(struct vfsmount *mnt, pid_t pid, pid_t tgid)
> > name.name = buf;
> > name.len = snprintf(buf, sizeof(buf), "%u", pid);
> > /* no ->d_hash() rejects on procfs */
> > - dentry = d_hash_and_lookup(mnt->mnt_root, &name);
> > + dentry = d_hash_and_lookup(mnt_root, &name);
> > if (dentry) {
> > d_invalidate(dentry);
> ... which can block
> > dput(dentry);
> ... and so can this
>
> > + rcu_read_lock();
> > + list_for_each_entry_rcu(fs_info, &upid->ns->proc_mounts, pidns_entry) {
> > + mnt_root = fs_info->m_super->s_root;
> > + proc_flush_task_mnt_root(mnt_root, upid->nr, tgid->numbers[i].nr);
>
> ... making that more than slightly unsafe.
I see. So, I can't use rcu locks here as well as spinlocks.
Thanks!
--
Rgrds, legion
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
