linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@redhat.com>
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>,
	Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>,
	linux-audit@redhat.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/11] audit: Allocate fsnotify mark independently of chunk
Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2018 10:09:09 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180914140909.4q77jy2nuqes2azt@madcap2.tricolour.ca> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180904160632.21210-10-jack@suse.cz>

On 2018-09-04 18:06, Jan Kara wrote:
> Allocate fsnotify mark independently instead of embedding it inside
> chunk. This will allow us to just replace chunk attached to mark when
> growing / shrinking chunk instead of replacing mark attached to inode
> which is a more complex operation.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
> ---
>  kernel/audit_tree.c | 64 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
>  1 file changed, 50 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/audit_tree.c b/kernel/audit_tree.c
> index 0cd08b3581f1..481fdc190c2f 100644
> --- a/kernel/audit_tree.c
> +++ b/kernel/audit_tree.c
> @@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ struct audit_tree {
>  struct audit_chunk {
>  	struct list_head hash;
>  	unsigned long key;
> -	struct fsnotify_mark mark;
> +	struct fsnotify_mark *mark;
>  	struct list_head trees;		/* with root here */
>  	int dead;
>  	int count;
> @@ -38,6 +38,11 @@ struct audit_chunk {
>  	} owners[];
>  };
>  
> +struct audit_tree_mark {
> +	struct fsnotify_mark mark;
> +	struct audit_chunk *chunk;
> +};
> +
>  static LIST_HEAD(tree_list);
>  static LIST_HEAD(prune_list);
>  static struct task_struct *prune_thread;
> @@ -73,6 +78,7 @@ static struct task_struct *prune_thread;
>   */
>  
>  static struct fsnotify_group *audit_tree_group;
> +static struct kmem_cache *audit_tree_mark_cachep __read_mostly;
>  
>  static struct audit_tree *alloc_tree(const char *s)
>  {
> @@ -142,10 +148,33 @@ static void audit_mark_put_chunk(struct audit_chunk *chunk)
>  	call_rcu(&chunk->head, __put_chunk);
>  }
>  
> +static inline struct audit_tree_mark *audit_mark(struct fsnotify_mark *entry)
> +{
> +	return container_of(entry, struct audit_tree_mark, mark);
> +}
> +
> +static struct audit_chunk *mark_chunk(struct fsnotify_mark *mark)
> +{
> +	return audit_mark(mark)->chunk;
> +}
> +
>  static void audit_tree_destroy_watch(struct fsnotify_mark *entry)
>  {
> -	struct audit_chunk *chunk = container_of(entry, struct audit_chunk, mark);
> +	struct audit_chunk *chunk = mark_chunk(entry);
>  	audit_mark_put_chunk(chunk);
> +	kmem_cache_free(audit_tree_mark_cachep, audit_mark(entry));
> +}
> +
> +static struct fsnotify_mark *alloc_mark(void)
> +{
> +	struct audit_tree_mark *mark;

Would it make sense to call this local variable "amark" to indicate it
isn't a struct fsnotify_mark, but in fact an audit helper variant?

> +
> +	mark = kmem_cache_zalloc(audit_tree_mark_cachep, GFP_KERNEL);
> +	if (!mark)
> +		return NULL;
> +	fsnotify_init_mark(&mark->mark, audit_tree_group);
> +	mark->mark.mask = FS_IN_IGNORED;
> +	return &mark->mark;

There are no other places where it is used in this patch to name a
variable, but this one I found a bit confusing to follow the
"mark->mark"

>  }
>  
>  static struct audit_chunk *alloc_chunk(int count)
> @@ -159,6 +188,13 @@ static struct audit_chunk *alloc_chunk(int count)
>  	if (!chunk)
>  		return NULL;
>  
> +	chunk->mark = alloc_mark();
> +	if (!chunk->mark) {
> +		kfree(chunk);
> +		return NULL;
> +	}
> +	audit_mark(chunk->mark)->chunk = chunk;
> +
>  	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&chunk->hash);
>  	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&chunk->trees);
>  	chunk->count = count;
> @@ -167,8 +203,6 @@ static struct audit_chunk *alloc_chunk(int count)
>  		INIT_LIST_HEAD(&chunk->owners[i].list);
>  		chunk->owners[i].index = i;
>  	}
> -	fsnotify_init_mark(&chunk->mark, audit_tree_group);
> -	chunk->mark.mask = FS_IN_IGNORED;
>  	return chunk;
>  }
>  
> @@ -278,7 +312,7 @@ static void replace_chunk(struct audit_chunk *new, struct audit_chunk *old,
>  static void untag_chunk(struct node *p)
>  {
>  	struct audit_chunk *chunk = find_chunk(p);
> -	struct fsnotify_mark *entry = &chunk->mark;
> +	struct fsnotify_mark *entry = chunk->mark;
>  	struct audit_chunk *new = NULL;
>  	struct audit_tree *owner;
>  	int size = chunk->count - 1;
> @@ -298,7 +332,7 @@ static void untag_chunk(struct node *p)
>  	if (chunk->dead || !(entry->flags & FSNOTIFY_MARK_FLAG_ATTACHED)) {
>  		mutex_unlock(&entry->group->mark_mutex);
>  		if (new)
> -			fsnotify_put_mark(&new->mark);
> +			fsnotify_put_mark(new->mark);
>  		goto out;
>  	}
>  
> @@ -322,9 +356,9 @@ static void untag_chunk(struct node *p)
>  	if (!new)
>  		goto Fallback;
>  
> -	if (fsnotify_add_mark_locked(&new->mark, entry->connector->obj,
> +	if (fsnotify_add_mark_locked(new->mark, entry->connector->obj,
>  				     FSNOTIFY_OBJ_TYPE_INODE, 1)) {
> -		fsnotify_put_mark(&new->mark);
> +		fsnotify_put_mark(new->mark);
>  		goto Fallback;
>  	}
>  
> @@ -344,7 +378,7 @@ static void untag_chunk(struct node *p)
>  	fsnotify_detach_mark(entry);
>  	mutex_unlock(&entry->group->mark_mutex);
>  	fsnotify_free_mark(entry);
> -	fsnotify_put_mark(&new->mark);	/* drop initial reference */
> +	fsnotify_put_mark(new->mark);	/* drop initial reference */
>  	goto out;
>  
>  Fallback:
> @@ -375,7 +409,7 @@ static int create_chunk(struct inode *inode, struct audit_tree *tree)
>  		return -ENOMEM;
>  	}
>  
> -	entry = &chunk->mark;
> +	entry = chunk->mark;
>  	if (fsnotify_add_inode_mark_locked(entry, inode, 0)) {
>  		mutex_unlock(&audit_tree_group->mark_mutex);
>  		fsnotify_put_mark(entry);
> @@ -426,7 +460,7 @@ static int tag_chunk(struct inode *inode, struct audit_tree *tree)
>  	if (!old_entry)
>  		return create_chunk(inode, tree);
>  
> -	old = container_of(old_entry, struct audit_chunk, mark);
> +	old = mark_chunk(old_entry)->chunk;
>  
>  	/* are we already there? */
>  	spin_lock(&hash_lock);
> @@ -447,7 +481,7 @@ static int tag_chunk(struct inode *inode, struct audit_tree *tree)
>  		return -ENOMEM;
>  	}
>  
> -	chunk_entry = &chunk->mark;
> +	chunk_entry = chunk->mark;
>  
>  	/*
>  	 * mark_mutex protects mark from getting detached and thus also from
> @@ -457,7 +491,7 @@ static int tag_chunk(struct inode *inode, struct audit_tree *tree)
>  		/* old_entry is being shot, lets just lie */
>  		mutex_unlock(&audit_tree_group->mark_mutex);
>  		fsnotify_put_mark(old_entry);
> -		fsnotify_put_mark(&chunk->mark);
> +		fsnotify_put_mark(chunk->mark);
>  		return -ENOENT;
>  	}
>  
> @@ -1011,7 +1045,7 @@ static int audit_tree_handle_event(struct fsnotify_group *group,
>  
>  static void audit_tree_freeing_mark(struct fsnotify_mark *entry, struct fsnotify_group *group)
>  {
> -	struct audit_chunk *chunk = container_of(entry, struct audit_chunk, mark);
> +	struct audit_chunk *chunk = mark_chunk(entry);
>  
>  	evict_chunk(chunk);
>  
> @@ -1032,6 +1066,8 @@ static int __init audit_tree_init(void)
>  {
>  	int i;
>  
> +	audit_tree_mark_cachep = KMEM_CACHE(audit_tree_mark, SLAB_PANIC);
> +
>  	audit_tree_group = fsnotify_alloc_group(&audit_tree_ops);
>  	if (IS_ERR(audit_tree_group))
>  		audit_panic("cannot initialize fsnotify group for rectree watches");
> -- 
> 2.16.4
> 

- RGB

--
Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@redhat.com>
Sr. S/W Engineer, Kernel Security, Base Operating Systems
Remote, Ottawa, Red Hat Canada
IRC: rgb, SunRaycer
Voice: +1.647.777.2635, Internal: (81) 32635

  reply	other threads:[~2018-09-14 19:28 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 ` [PATCH 02/11] audit: Fix possible spurious -ENOSPC error Jan Kara
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 [this message]
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=20180914140909.4q77jy2nuqes2azt@madcap2.tricolour.ca \
    --to=rgb@redhat.com \
    --cc=amir73il@gmail.com \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=linux-audit@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=paul@paul-moore.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).