From: Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@cyphar.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>,
"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Eric Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>, Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
Tycho Andersen <tycho@tycho.ws>,
David Drysdale <drysdale@google.com>,
Chanho Min <chanho.min@lge.com>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>, Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
Christian Brauner <christian@brauner.io>,
Aleksa Sarai <asarai@suse.de>,
Linux Containers <containers@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
alpha <linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
GNU C Library <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>,
linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK"
<linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-m68k <linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org>,
linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
linux-s390 <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux-sh list <linux-sh@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v14 2/6] namei: LOOKUP_IN_ROOT: chroot-like path resolution
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2019 15:15:41 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191012041541.milbmfbjpj5bcl5a@yavin.dot.cyphar.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191012040815.gnc43cfmo5mnv67u@yavin.dot.cyphar.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4304 bytes --]
On 2019-10-12, Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@cyphar.com> wrote:
> On 2019-10-10, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 10:42 PM Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@cyphar.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > --- a/fs/namei.c
> > > +++ b/fs/namei.c
> > > @@ -2277,6 +2277,11 @@ static const char *path_init(struct nameidata *nd, unsigned flags)
> > >
> > > nd->m_seq = read_seqbegin(&mount_lock);
> > >
> > > + /* LOOKUP_IN_ROOT treats absolute paths as being relative-to-dirfd. */
> > > + if (flags & LOOKUP_IN_ROOT)
> > > + while (*s == '/')
> > > + s++;
> > > +
> > > /* Figure out the starting path and root (if needed). */
> > > if (*s == '/') {
> > > error = nd_jump_root(nd);
> >
> > Hmm. Wouldn't this make more sense all inside the if (*s =- '/') test?
> > That way if would be where we check for "should we start at the root",
> > which seems to make more sense conceptually.
>
> I don't really agree (though I do think that both options are pretty
> ugly). Doing it before the block makes it clear that absolute paths are
> just treated relative-to-dirfd -- doing it inside the block makes it
> look more like "/" is a special-case for nd_jump_root(). And while that
Sorry, I meant "special-case for LOOKUP_IN_ROOT".
> is somewhat true, this is just a side-effect of making the code more
> clean -- my earlier versions reworked the dirfd handling to always grab
> nd->root first if LOOKUP_IS_SCOPED. I switched to this method based on
> Al's review.
>
> In fairness, I do agree that the lonely while loop looks ugly.
And with the old way I did it (where we grabbed nd->root first) the
semantics were slightly more clear -- stripping leading "/"s doesn't
really look as "clearly obvious" as grabbing nd->root beforehand and
treating "/"s normally. But the code was also needlessly more complex.
> > That test for '/' currently has a "} else if (..)", but that's
> > pointless since it ends with a "return" anyway. So the "else" logic is
> > just noise.
>
> This depends on the fact that LOOKUP_BENEATH always triggers -EXDEV for
> nd_jump_root() -- if we ever add another "scoped lookup" flag then the
> logic will have to be further reworked.
>
> (It should be noted that the new version doesn't always end with a
> "return", but you could change it to act that way given the above
> assumption.)
>
> > And if you get rid of the unnecessary else, moving the LOOKUP_IN_ROOT
> > inside the if-statement works fine.
> >
> > So this could be something like
> >
> > --- a/fs/namei.c
> > +++ b/fs/namei.c
> > @@ -2194,11 +2196,19 @@ static const char *path_init(struct
> > nameidata *nd, unsigned flags)
> >
> > nd->m_seq = read_seqbegin(&mount_lock);
> > if (*s == '/') {
> > - set_root(nd);
> > - if (likely(!nd_jump_root(nd)))
> > - return s;
> > - return ERR_PTR(-ECHILD);
> > - } else if (nd->dfd == AT_FDCWD) {
> > + /* LOOKUP_IN_ROOT treats absolute paths as being
> > relative-to-dirfd. */
> > + if (!(flags & LOOKUP_IN_ROOT)) {
> > + set_root(nd);
> > + if (likely(!nd_jump_root(nd)))
> > + return s;
> > + return ERR_PTR(-ECHILD);
> > + }
> > +
> > + /* Skip initial '/' for LOOKUP_IN_ROOT */
> > + do { s++; } while (*s == '/');
> > + }
> > +
> > + if (nd->dfd == AT_FDCWD) {
> > if (flags & LOOKUP_RCU) {
> > struct fs_struct *fs = current->fs;
> > unsigned seq;
> >
> > instead. The patch ends up slightly bigger (due to the re-indentation)
> > but now it handles all the "start at root" in the same place. Doesn't
> > that make sense?
>
> It is correct (though I'd need to clean it up a bit to handle
> nd_jump_root() correctly), and if you really would like me to change it
> I will -- but I just don't agree that it's cleaner.
--
Aleksa Sarai
Senior Software Engineer (Containers)
SUSE Linux GmbH
<https://www.cyphar.com/>
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-12 4:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-10 5:41 [PATCH v14 0/6] open: introduce openat2(2) syscall Aleksa Sarai
2019-10-10 5:41 ` [PATCH v14 1/6] namei: O_BENEATH-style resolution restriction flags Aleksa Sarai
2019-10-10 5:41 ` [PATCH v14 2/6] namei: LOOKUP_IN_ROOT: chroot-like path resolution Aleksa Sarai
2019-10-10 17:07 ` Linus Torvalds
2019-10-12 4:08 ` Aleksa Sarai
2019-10-12 4:15 ` Aleksa Sarai [this message]
2019-10-24 7:06 ` Aleksa Sarai
2019-10-10 5:41 ` [PATCH v14 3/6] namei: permit ".." resolution with LOOKUP_{IN_ROOT,BENEATH} Aleksa Sarai
2019-10-10 5:41 ` [PATCH v14 4/6] open: introduce openat2(2) syscall Aleksa Sarai
2019-10-10 5:41 ` [PATCH v14 5/6] selftests: add openat2(2) selftests Aleksa Sarai
2019-10-10 5:41 ` [PATCH v14 6/6] Documentation: path-lookup: mention LOOKUP_MAGICLINK_JUMPED Aleksa Sarai
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=20191012041541.milbmfbjpj5bcl5a@yavin.dot.cyphar.com \
--to=cyphar@cyphar.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=asarai@suse.de \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
--cc=chanho.min@lge.com \
--cc=christian@brauner.io \
--cc=containers@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=drysdale@google.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=jannh@google.com \
--cc=jlayton@kernel.org \
--cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
--cc=linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org \
--cc=linux-mips@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org \
--cc=linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=skhan@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=sparclinux@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=tycho@tycho.ws \
--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).