linux-unionfs.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
Cc: Chengguang Xu <cgxu519@mykernel.net>,
	overlayfs <linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] ovl: consistent behavior for immutable/append-only inodes
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2021 18:54:24 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAOQ4uxgdWwrOa79BRzZ1PS6SxmLtywQCAr3+WLRZPx38aHHyQw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJfpegv9e1oTyu+9Z-TyZQmNG0NrJhokXd8UbaRNft3_bwBEjQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 4:57 PM Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 17 Jun 2021 at 17:22, Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Instead, if any of the fileattr flags of interest exist on the lower
> > inode, we store them in overlay.xflags xattr on the upper inode and we
> > we read the flags from xattr on lookup and on fileattr_get().
>
> Calling this xflags, especially near fileattr code, makes it easy to
> confuse with fsx_xflags.   Can we find a more distinctive name?
>

Indeed. I'll change to overlay.protected as suggested in the v1
patch discussion.

> > diff --git a/fs/overlayfs/inode.c b/fs/overlayfs/inode.c
> > index aec353a2dc80..d66e51b9c347 100644
> > --- a/fs/overlayfs/inode.c
> > +++ b/fs/overlayfs/inode.c
> > @@ -162,7 +162,8 @@ int ovl_getattr(struct user_namespace *mnt_userns, const struct path *path,
> >         enum ovl_path_type type;
> >         struct path realpath;
> >         const struct cred *old_cred;
> > -       bool is_dir = S_ISDIR(dentry->d_inode->i_mode);
> > +       struct inode *inode = d_inode(dentry);
> > +       bool is_dir = S_ISDIR(inode->i_mode);
> >         int fsid = 0;
> >         int err;
> >         bool metacopy_blocks = false;
> > @@ -175,6 +176,10 @@ int ovl_getattr(struct user_namespace *mnt_userns, const struct path *path,
> >         if (err)
> >                 goto out;
> >
> > +       /* Report immutable/append-only STATX flags */
> > +       if (ovl_test_flag(OVL_XFLAGS, inode))
> > +               ovl_fill_xflags(inode, stat, NULL);
> > +
>
> Filesystems are doing these transformations: (already down one from
> before fileattr)
>
> internal flags -> statx->attributes
> internal flags -> inode->i_flags
> internal flags <-> fa->flags or fa->fsx_xflags
>
> To further improve this situation the statx filling could be moved to
> generic code based on i_flags.  I'm not asking you to convert all
> filesystems (though that would be nice), but adding the helpers and
> using them here would be a good first step.
>

I am afraid that the only flags this would be relevant to are (a) and (i),
so not sure it is worth the generic helper, but I will look into it.

> > @@ -639,6 +642,174 @@ int ovl_set_impure(struct dentry *dentry, struct dentry *upperdentry)
> >         return err;
> >  }
> >
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * Overlayfs stores immutable/append-only attributes in overlay.xflags xattr.
> > + * If upper inode does have those fileattr flags set (i.e. from old kernel),
> > + * overlayfs does not clear them on fileattr_get(), but it will clear them on
> > + * fileattr_set().
> > + */
> > +#define OVL_XFLAG(c, x) \
> > +       { c, S_ ## x, FS_ ## x ## _FL, FS_XFLAG_ ## x, STATX_ATTR_ ## x }
> > +
> > +struct ovl_xflag {
> > +       char code;
> > +       u32 i_flag;
> > +       u32 fs_flag;
> > +       u32 fsx_flag;
> > +       u64 statx_attr;
> > +} const ovl_xflags[] = {
> > +       OVL_XFLAG('a', APPEND),
> > +       OVL_XFLAG('i', IMMUTABLE),
> > +};
>
> This would be really nice for a dozen flags, but for two...
>
> My guess is that many lines of code could be saved by un-generalizing this.
>

Perhaps. I'll try.

> > +/* Set inode flags and xflags xattr from fileattr */
> > +int ovl_set_xflags(struct inode *inode, struct dentry *upper,
> > +                  struct fileattr *fa)
> > +{
> > +       struct ovl_fs *ofs = OVL_FS(inode->i_sb);
> > +       char buf[OVL_XFLAGS_NUM];
> > +       int len, err = 0;
> > +
> > +       BUILD_BUG_ON(OVL_XFLAGS_NUM >= OVL_XFLAGS_MAX);
> > +       len = ovl_xflags_to_buf(inode, buf, OVL_XFLAGS_NUM, fa);
> > +
> > +       /*
> > +        * Do not fail when upper doesn't support xattrs, but also do not
> > +        * mask out the xattr xflags from real fileattr to continue
> > +        * supporting fileattr_set() on fs without xattr support.
> > +        * Remove xattr if it exist and all flags are cleared.
> > +        */
>
> Does this matter in practice?   I.e. is there any filesystem with
> immutable/append attribute but not xattr that could be an upper layer?

I did not find any, but did not want to take the risk, because maybe
there is a fs that does not support trusted.xattr but does support fileattr -
I did not check that. And the fallback seemed pretty safe to me.
I am also fine with failing fileattr_set() in that case.

>
> If yes, then this could end up as a copy-up regression (failure to
> copy up files having immutable/append).

No, because ovl_copy_xflags() always masks those flags on copy up:

        BUILD_BUG_ON(OVL_COPY_FS_FLAGS_MASK & ~FS_COMMON_FL);
        newfa.flags &= ~OVL_COPY_FS_FLAGS_MASK;
        newfa.flags |= (oldfa.flags & OVL_COPY_FS_FLAGS_MASK);

        BUILD_BUG_ON(OVL_COPY_FSX_FLAGS_MASK & ~FS_XFLAG_COMMON);
        newfa.fsx_xflags &= ~OVL_COPY_FSX_FLAGS_MASK;
        newfa.fsx_xflags |= (oldfa.fsx_xflags & OVL_COPY_FSX_FLAGS_MASK);

The comment above about not clearing the immutable flag is referring
specifically to fileattr_set().

Thanks,
Amir.

      reply	other threads:[~2021-06-18 15:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-06-17 15:22 [PATCH v2 0/3] Overlayfs fileattr related fixes Amir Goldstein
2021-06-17 15:22 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] ovl: pass ovl_fs to ovl_check_setxattr() Amir Goldstein
2021-06-17 15:22 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] ovl: copy up sync/noatime fileattr flags Amir Goldstein
2021-06-17 15:22 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] ovl: consistent behavior for immutable/append-only inodes Amir Goldstein
2021-06-18 13:57   ` Miklos Szeredi
2021-06-18 15:54     ` Amir Goldstein [this message]

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=CAOQ4uxgdWwrOa79BRzZ1PS6SxmLtywQCAr3+WLRZPx38aHHyQw@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=amir73il@gmail.com \
    --cc=cgxu519@mykernel.net \
    --cc=linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] ovl: consistent behavior for immutable/append-only inodes' \
    /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

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).