linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
To: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: "Eric W . Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Subject: [PATCH] fput: Allow calling __fput_sync() from !PF_KTHREAD thread.
Date: Wed,  8 Jul 2020 23:24:09 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200708142409.8965-1-penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> (raw)

__fput_sync() was introduced by commit 4a9d4b024a3102fc ("switch fput to
task_work_add") with BUG_ON(!(current->flags & PF_KTHREAD)) check, and
the only user of __fput_sync() was introduced by commit 17c0a5aaffa63da6
("make acct_kill() wait for file closing."). However, the latter commit is
effectively calling __fput_sync() from !PF_KTHREAD thread because of
schedule_work() call followed by immediate wait_for_completion() call.
That is, there is no need to defer close_work() to a WQ context. I guess
that the reason to defer was nothing but to bypass this BUG_ON() check.
While we need to remain careful about calling __fput_sync(), we can remove
bypassable BUG_ON() check from __fput_sync().

Signed-off-by: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
---
Al, is this change acceptable?

Eric is trying to use fput()/flush_delayed_fput()/task_work_run() from
blob_to_mnt() which is going to be introduced by
https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200702164140.4468-8-ebiederm@xmission.com
in order to make sure that a file (which was opened for writing and is
intended to be execve()d shortly) is closed by current thread before
leaving blob_to_mnt().

But since current thread might fail to find the interested file (which was
opened for writing and is intended to be execve()d shortly) and/or might find
uninterested files (which current thread does not need to process) when
multiple threads concurrently called flush_delayed_fput(), I think that we
should use __fput_sync() in order to make sure that only the interested file
is closed by current thread.

Therefore, I propose this change.

 fs/file_table.c | 15 +++++----------
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/file_table.c b/fs/file_table.c
index 656647f9575a..7c4125179469 100644
--- a/fs/file_table.c
+++ b/fs/file_table.c
@@ -359,20 +359,15 @@ void fput(struct file *file)
 }
 
 /*
- * synchronous analog of fput(); for kernel threads that might be needed
- * in some umount() (and thus can't use flush_delayed_fput() without
- * risking deadlocks), need to wait for completion of __fput() and know
- * for this specific struct file it won't involve anything that would
- * need them.  Use only if you really need it - at the very least,
- * don't blindly convert fput() by kernel thread to that.
+ * synchronous analog of fput(); for threads that need to wait for completion
+ * of __fput() and know for this specific struct file it won't involve anything
+ * that would need them.  Use only if you really need it - at the very least,
+ * don't blindly convert fput() to __fput_sync().
  */
 void __fput_sync(struct file *file)
 {
-	if (atomic_long_dec_and_test(&file->f_count)) {
-		struct task_struct *task = current;
-		BUG_ON(!(task->flags & PF_KTHREAD));
+	if (atomic_long_dec_and_test(&file->f_count))
 		__fput(file);
-	}
 }
 
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(fput);
-- 
2.18.4


             reply	other threads:[~2020-07-08 14:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-07-08 14:24 Tetsuo Handa [this message]
2020-07-29 13:04 ` [PATCH v2] fput: Allow calling __fput_sync() from !PF_KTHREAD thread Tetsuo Handa
2020-08-19 12:42   ` [PATCH v2 (resend)] " Tetsuo Handa
2020-09-09 21:59     ` Tetsuo Handa
2020-09-10  3:57   ` [PATCH v2] " Al Viro
2020-09-10  5:26     ` Tetsuo Handa
2020-09-10 11:25       ` Al Viro
2020-09-10 20:06         ` Eric W. Biederman

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=20200708142409.8965-1-penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp \
    --to=penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp \
    --cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --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).