From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
To: Gabriel Krisman Bertazi <krisman@suse.de>
Cc: brauner@kernel.org, tytso@mit.edu,
linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, jaegeuk@kernel.org,
linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org,
Gabriel Krisman Bertazi <krisman@collabora.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/7] libfs: Validate negative dentries in case-insensitive directories
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2023 21:29:39 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230722042939.GC5660@sol.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87bkg53tr5.fsf@suse.de>
On Fri, Jul 21, 2023 at 04:16:30PM -0400, Gabriel Krisman Bertazi wrote:
> Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org> writes:
>
> > On Wed, Jul 19, 2023 at 11:06:57PM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
> >>
> >> I'm also having trouble understanding exactly when ->d_name is stable here.
> >> AFAICS, unfortunately the VFS has an edge case where a dentry can be moved
> >> without its parent's ->i_rwsem being held. It happens when a subdirectory is
> >> "found" under multiple names. The VFS doesn't support directory hard links, so
> >> if it finds a second link to a directory, it just moves the whole dentry tree to
> >> the new location. This can happen if a filesystem image is corrupted and
> >> contains directory hard links. Coincidentally, it can also happen in an
> >> encrypted directory due to the no-key name => normal name transition...
> >
> > Sorry, I think I got this slightly wrong. The move does happen with the
> > parent's ->i_rwsem held, but it's for read, not for write. First, before
> > ->lookup is called, the ->i_rwsem of the parent directory is taken for read.
> > ->lookup() calls d_splice_alias() which can call __d_unalias() which does the
> > __d_move(). If the old alias is in a different directory (which cannot happen
> > in that fscrypt case, but can happen in the general "directory hard links"
> > case), __d_unalias() takes that directory's ->i_rwsem for read too.
> >
> > So it looks like the parent's ->i_rwsem does indeed exclude moves of child
> > dentries, but only if it's taken for *write*. So I guess you can rely on that;
> > it's just a bit more subtle than it first appears. Though, some of your
> > explanation seems to assume that a read lock is sufficient ("In __lookup_slow,
> > either the parent inode is locked by the caller (lookup_slow) ..."), so maybe
> > there is still a problem.
>
> I think I'm missing something on your clarification. I see your point
> about __d_unalias, and I see in the case where alias->d_parent !=
> dentry->d_parent we acquire the parent inode read lock:
>
> static int __d_unalias(struct inode *inode,
> struct dentry *dentry, struct dentry *alias)
> {
> ...
> m1 = &dentry->d_sb->s_vfs_rename_mutex;
> if (!inode_trylock_shared(alias->d_parent->d_inode))
> goto out_err;
> }
>
> And it seems to use that for __d_move. In this case, __d_move changes
> from under us even with a read lock, which is dangerous. I think I
> agree with your first email more than the clarification.
>
> In the lookup_slow then:
>
> lookup_slow()
> d_lookup()
> d_splice_alias()
> __d_unalias()
> __d_move()
>
> this __d_move Can do a dentry move and race with d_revalidate even
> though it has the parent read lock.
>
> > So it looks like the parent's ->i_rwsem does indeed exclude moves of child
> > dentries, but only if it's taken for *write*. So I guess you can rely on that;
>
> We can get away of it with acquiring the d_lock as you suggested, I
> think. But can you clarify the above? I wanna make sure I didn't miss
> anything. I am indeed relying only on the read lock here, as you can see.
In my first email I thought that __d_move() can be called without the parent
inode's i_rwsem held at all. In my second email I realized that it is always
called with at least a read (shared) lock.
The question is what kind of parent i_rwsem lock is guaranteed to be held by the
caller of ->d_revalidate() when the name comparison is done. Based on the
above, it needs to be at least a write (exclusive) lock to exclude __d_move()
without taking d_lock. However, your analysis (in the commit message of "libfs:
Validate negative dentries in case-insensitive directories") only talks about
i_rwsem being "taken", without saying whether it's for read or write. One thing
you mentioned as taking i_rwsem is lookup_slow, but that only takes it for read.
That seems like a problem, as it makes your analysis not correct.
- Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-07-22 4:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-07-19 22:19 [PATCH v3 0/7] Support negative dentries on case-insensitive ext4 and f2fs Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2023-07-19 22:19 ` [PATCH v3 1/7] fs: Expose name under lookup to d_revalidate hook Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2023-07-19 22:19 ` [PATCH v3 2/7] fs: Add DCACHE_CASEFOLDED_NAME flag Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2023-07-19 22:19 ` [PATCH v3 3/7] libfs: Validate negative dentries in case-insensitive directories Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2023-07-20 6:06 ` Eric Biggers
2023-07-20 6:41 ` Eric Biggers
2023-07-21 20:16 ` Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2023-07-22 4:29 ` Eric Biggers [this message]
2023-07-24 21:33 ` Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2023-07-19 22:19 ` [PATCH v3 4/7] libfs: Chain encryption checks after case-insensitive revalidation Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2023-07-19 22:19 ` [PATCH v3 5/7] libfs: Merge encrypted_ci_dentry_ops and ci_dentry_ops Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2023-07-19 22:19 ` [PATCH v3 6/7] ext4: Enable negative dentries on case-insensitive lookup Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2023-07-19 22:19 ` [PATCH v3 7/7] f2fs: " Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2023-07-20 7:43 ` [PATCH v3 0/7] Support negative dentries on case-insensitive ext4 and f2fs Eric Biggers
2023-07-20 17:35 ` Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
2023-07-21 3:12 ` Eric Biggers
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20230722042939.GC5660@sol.localdomain \
--to=ebiggers@kernel.org \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=jaegeuk@kernel.org \
--cc=krisman@collabora.com \
--cc=krisman@suse.de \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).