From: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
To: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>,
linux-audit@redhat.com, <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
rgb@redhat.com, Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>,
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Subject: [PATCH 02/11] audit: Fix possible spurious -ENOSPC error
Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2018 18:06:22 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180904160632.21210-3-jack@suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180904160632.21210-1-jack@suse.cz>
When an inode is tagged with a tree, tag_chunk() checks whether there is
audit_tree_group mark attached to the inode and adds one if not. However
nothing protects another tag_chunk() to add the mark between we've
checked and try to add the fsnotify mark thus resulting in an error from
fsnotify_add_mark() and consequently an ENOSPC error from tag_chunk().
Fix the problem by holding mark_mutex over the whole check-insert code
sequence.
Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
---
kernel/audit_tree.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++----------
1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/audit_tree.c b/kernel/audit_tree.c
index 1b55b1026a36..8a74b468b666 100644
--- a/kernel/audit_tree.c
+++ b/kernel/audit_tree.c
@@ -342,25 +342,29 @@ static void untag_chunk(struct node *p)
spin_lock(&hash_lock);
}
+/* Call with group->mark_mutex held, releases it */
static int create_chunk(struct inode *inode, struct audit_tree *tree)
{
struct fsnotify_mark *entry;
struct audit_chunk *chunk = alloc_chunk(1);
- if (!chunk)
+
+ if (!chunk) {
+ mutex_unlock(&audit_tree_group->mark_mutex);
return -ENOMEM;
+ }
entry = &chunk->mark;
- if (fsnotify_add_inode_mark(entry, inode, 0)) {
+ if (fsnotify_add_inode_mark_locked(entry, inode, 0)) {
+ mutex_unlock(&audit_tree_group->mark_mutex);
fsnotify_put_mark(entry);
return -ENOSPC;
}
- mutex_lock(&entry->group->mark_mutex);
spin_lock(&hash_lock);
if (tree->goner) {
spin_unlock(&hash_lock);
chunk->dead = 1;
- mutex_unlock(&entry->group->mark_mutex);
+ mutex_unlock(&audit_tree_group->mark_mutex);
fsnotify_destroy_mark(entry, audit_tree_group);
fsnotify_put_mark(entry);
return 0;
@@ -375,7 +379,7 @@ static int create_chunk(struct inode *inode, struct audit_tree *tree)
}
insert_hash(chunk);
spin_unlock(&hash_lock);
- mutex_unlock(&entry->group->mark_mutex);
+ mutex_unlock(&audit_tree_group->mark_mutex);
fsnotify_put_mark(entry); /* drop initial reference */
return 0;
}
@@ -389,6 +393,7 @@ static int tag_chunk(struct inode *inode, struct audit_tree *tree)
struct node *p;
int n;
+ mutex_lock(&audit_tree_group->mark_mutex);
old_entry = fsnotify_find_mark(&inode->i_fsnotify_marks,
audit_tree_group);
if (!old_entry)
@@ -401,6 +406,7 @@ static int tag_chunk(struct inode *inode, struct audit_tree *tree)
for (n = 0; n < old->count; n++) {
if (old->owners[n].owner == tree) {
spin_unlock(&hash_lock);
+ mutex_unlock(&audit_tree_group->mark_mutex);
fsnotify_put_mark(old_entry);
return 0;
}
@@ -409,20 +415,20 @@ static int tag_chunk(struct inode *inode, struct audit_tree *tree)
chunk = alloc_chunk(old->count + 1);
if (!chunk) {
+ mutex_unlock(&audit_tree_group->mark_mutex);
fsnotify_put_mark(old_entry);
return -ENOMEM;
}
chunk_entry = &chunk->mark;
- mutex_lock(&old_entry->group->mark_mutex);
/*
* mark_mutex protects mark from getting detached and thus also from
* mark->connector->obj getting NULL.
*/
if (!(old_entry->flags & FSNOTIFY_MARK_FLAG_ATTACHED)) {
/* old_entry is being shot, lets just lie */
- mutex_unlock(&old_entry->group->mark_mutex);
+ mutex_unlock(&audit_tree_group->mark_mutex);
fsnotify_put_mark(old_entry);
fsnotify_put_mark(&chunk->mark);
return -ENOENT;
@@ -430,7 +436,7 @@ static int tag_chunk(struct inode *inode, struct audit_tree *tree)
if (fsnotify_add_mark_locked(chunk_entry, old_entry->connector->obj,
FSNOTIFY_OBJ_TYPE_INODE, 1)) {
- mutex_unlock(&old_entry->group->mark_mutex);
+ mutex_unlock(&audit_tree_group->mark_mutex);
fsnotify_put_mark(chunk_entry);
fsnotify_put_mark(old_entry);
return -ENOSPC;
@@ -440,7 +446,7 @@ static int tag_chunk(struct inode *inode, struct audit_tree *tree)
if (tree->goner) {
spin_unlock(&hash_lock);
chunk->dead = 1;
- mutex_unlock(&old_entry->group->mark_mutex);
+ mutex_unlock(&audit_tree_group->mark_mutex);
fsnotify_destroy_mark(chunk_entry, audit_tree_group);
@@ -471,7 +477,7 @@ static int tag_chunk(struct inode *inode, struct audit_tree *tree)
list_add(&tree->same_root, &chunk->trees);
}
spin_unlock(&hash_lock);
- mutex_unlock(&old_entry->group->mark_mutex);
+ mutex_unlock(&audit_tree_group->mark_mutex);
fsnotify_destroy_mark(old_entry, audit_tree_group);
fsnotify_put_mark(chunk_entry); /* drop initial reference */
fsnotify_put_mark(old_entry); /* pair to fsnotify_find mark_entry */
--
2.16.4
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-09-04 20:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-09-04 16:06 [PATCH 0/11 v3] audit: Fix various races when tagging and untagging mounts Jan Kara
2018-09-04 16:06 ` [PATCH 01/11] audit_tree: Remove mark->lock locking Jan Kara
2018-09-04 16:06 ` Jan Kara [this message]
2018-09-04 16:06 ` [PATCH 03/11] audit: Fix possible tagging failures Jan Kara
2018-09-04 16:06 ` [PATCH 04/11] audit: Embed key into chunk Jan Kara
2018-09-13 20:06 ` Richard Guy Briggs
2018-09-04 16:06 ` [PATCH 05/11] audit: Make hash table insertion safe against concurrent lookups Jan Kara
2018-09-04 16:06 ` [PATCH 06/11] audit: Factor out chunk replacement code Jan Kara
2018-09-04 16:06 ` [PATCH 07/11] audit: Remove pointless check in insert_hash() Jan Kara
2018-09-04 16:06 ` [PATCH 08/11] audit: Provide helper for dropping mark's chunk reference Jan Kara
2018-09-04 16:06 ` [PATCH 09/11] audit: Allocate fsnotify mark independently of chunk Jan Kara
2018-09-14 14:09 ` Richard Guy Briggs
2018-09-17 16:46 ` Jan Kara
2018-10-03 22:11 ` Paul Moore
2018-10-03 22:08 ` Paul Moore
2018-10-03 22:39 ` Richard Guy Briggs
2018-10-04 6:57 ` Jan Kara
2018-09-04 16:06 ` [PATCH 10/11] audit: Replace chunk attached to mark instead of replacing mark Jan Kara
2018-09-04 16:06 ` [PATCH 11/11] audit: Use 'mark' name for fsnotify_mark variables Jan Kara
2018-09-14 18:29 ` Richard Guy Briggs
2018-09-17 16:44 ` Jan Kara
2018-09-17 18:13 ` Richard Guy Briggs
2018-09-04 16:06 ` [PATCH 12/11 TESTSUITE] audit_testsuite: Add stress test for tree watches Jan Kara
2018-09-14 18:21 ` Richard Guy Briggs
2018-09-17 16:56 ` Jan Kara
2018-10-05 21:06 ` Paul Moore
2018-10-09 7:40 ` Jan Kara
2018-10-10 6:43 ` Paul Moore
2018-10-11 11:39 ` Jan Kara
2018-10-11 23:03 ` Paul Moore
2018-10-15 10:04 ` Jan Kara
2018-10-15 15:39 ` Paul Moore
2018-10-17 10:09 ` Jan Kara
2018-11-14 0:34 ` Paul Moore
2018-11-14 12:16 ` Jan Kara
2018-11-19 15:19 ` Paul Moore
2018-09-14 19:13 ` [PATCH 0/11 v3] audit: Fix various races when tagging and untagging mounts Richard Guy Briggs
2018-09-17 16:57 ` Jan Kara
2018-10-04 1:20 ` Paul Moore
2018-10-04 6:59 ` Jan Kara
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=20180904160632.21210-3-jack@suse.cz \
--to=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=amir73il@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-audit@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paul@paul-moore.com \
--cc=rgb@redhat.com \
--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).