From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1BBAC43603 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2019 01:31:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8E512073D for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2019 01:31:27 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1576027887; bh=ayrRyJnyptOfktmNxEljwT35wIELYQ7274jJUpAhJaM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=XPpxpaWx/8ZRtYvioP1p9+X5nkI7NKKCpDLBDOzsgmnu/8ilhTDJZ+HJvc6E7GYfW zT2XsQimpFHjJjOwdLR5nW+nu2TTuTSzE70Pxe8IbZ3L+68Q2uMRwHmFSjChD+idRk qFi/XPl03vxS0FrGh+CBLpTsKJJaCkvcwXchGcyI= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727419AbfLKBb0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Dec 2019 20:31:26 -0500 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:51928 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726417AbfLKBb0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Dec 2019 20:31:26 -0500 Received: from localhost (unknown [104.132.0.81]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CD32F2073B; Wed, 11 Dec 2019 01:31:24 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1576027884; bh=ayrRyJnyptOfktmNxEljwT35wIELYQ7274jJUpAhJaM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=z4vtjpUtYFXF+JqrxopTyU2W8dgJK7H9xczwTosw1BBFVKkcn/tUh5pBTwfAK8y+6 ojDE+1cq+MRY4Zg9SzvV3x6+XGZOkHbCe1aBYOWXPg7I8cnlUIpj71mtBfjSfFGSL3 3d8IBdO5ztUND3XEpq1RAfKx4CaRtt8hCqf3/3Fk= Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2019 17:31:24 -0800 From: Jaegeuk Kim To: Chao Yu Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 6/6] f2fs: set I_LINKABLE early to avoid wrong access by vfs Message-ID: <20191211013124.GB57416@jaegeuk-macbookpro.roam.corp.google.com> References: <20191209222345.1078-1-jaegeuk@kernel.org> <20191209222345.1078-6-jaegeuk@kernel.org> <88dcbca9-3757-a440-ed73-9d99a56b816c@huawei.com> <20191211012121.GA52962@jaegeuk-macbookpro.roam.corp.google.com> <00ced682-9522-236d-4078-4c8f2e348d39@huawei.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <00ced682-9522-236d-4078-4c8f2e348d39@huawei.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.8.2 (2017-04-18) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 12/11, Chao Yu wrote: > On 2019/12/11 9:21, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > > On 12/10, Chao Yu wrote: > >> On 2019/12/10 6:23, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > >>> This patch moves setting I_LINKABLE early in rename2(whiteout) to avoid the > >>> below warning. > >>> > >>> [ 3189.163385] WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 59523 at fs/inode.c:358 inc_nlink+0x32/0x40 > >>> [ 3189.246979] Call Trace: > >>> [ 3189.248707] f2fs_init_inode_metadata+0x2d6/0x440 [f2fs] > >>> [ 3189.251399] f2fs_add_inline_entry+0x162/0x8c0 [f2fs] > >>> [ 3189.254010] f2fs_add_dentry+0x69/0xe0 [f2fs] > >>> [ 3189.256353] f2fs_do_add_link+0xc5/0x100 [f2fs] > >>> [ 3189.258774] f2fs_rename2+0xabf/0x1010 [f2fs] > >>> [ 3189.261079] vfs_rename+0x3f8/0xaa0 > >>> [ 3189.263056] ? tomoyo_path_rename+0x44/0x60 > >>> [ 3189.265283] ? do_renameat2+0x49b/0x550 > >>> [ 3189.267324] do_renameat2+0x49b/0x550 > >>> [ 3189.269316] __x64_sys_renameat2+0x20/0x30 > >>> [ 3189.271441] do_syscall_64+0x5a/0x230 > >>> [ 3189.273410] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x49/0xbe > >>> [ 3189.275848] RIP: 0033:0x7f270b4d9a49 > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim > >>> --- > >>> fs/f2fs/namei.c | 27 +++++++++++++-------------- > >>> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/namei.c b/fs/f2fs/namei.c > >>> index a1c507b0b4ac..5d9584281935 100644 > >>> --- a/fs/f2fs/namei.c > >>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/namei.c > >>> @@ -797,6 +797,7 @@ static int __f2fs_tmpfile(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry, > >>> > >>> if (whiteout) { > >>> f2fs_i_links_write(inode, false); > >>> + inode->i_state |= I_LINKABLE; > >>> *whiteout = inode; > >>> } else { > >>> d_tmpfile(dentry, inode); > >>> @@ -867,6 +868,12 @@ static int f2fs_rename(struct inode *old_dir, struct dentry *old_dentry, > >>> F2FS_I(old_dentry->d_inode)->i_projid))) > >>> return -EXDEV; > >>> > >>> + if (flags & RENAME_WHITEOUT) { > >>> + err = f2fs_create_whiteout(old_dir, &whiteout); > >>> + if (err) > >>> + return err; > >>> + } > >> > >> To record quota info correctly, we need to create whiteout inode after > >> dquot_initialize(old_dir)? > > > > __f2fs_tmpfile() will do it. > > Okay. > > Any comments on below question? > > > > >> > >>> + > >>> err = dquot_initialize(old_dir); > >>> if (err) > >>> goto out; > >>> @@ -898,17 +905,11 @@ static int f2fs_rename(struct inode *old_dir, struct dentry *old_dentry, > >>> } > >>> } > >>> > >>> - if (flags & RENAME_WHITEOUT) { > >>> - err = f2fs_create_whiteout(old_dir, &whiteout); > >>> - if (err) > >>> - goto out_dir; > >>> - } > >>> - > >>> if (new_inode) { > >>> > >>> err = -ENOTEMPTY; > >>> if (old_dir_entry && !f2fs_empty_dir(new_inode)) > >>> - goto out_whiteout; > >>> + goto out_dir; > >>> > >>> err = -ENOENT; > >>> new_entry = f2fs_find_entry(new_dir, &new_dentry->d_name, > >>> @@ -916,7 +917,7 @@ static int f2fs_rename(struct inode *old_dir, struct dentry *old_dentry, > >>> if (!new_entry) { > >>> if (IS_ERR(new_page)) > >>> err = PTR_ERR(new_page); > >>> - goto out_whiteout; > >>> + goto out_dir; > >>> } > >>> > >>> f2fs_balance_fs(sbi, true); > >>> @@ -948,7 +949,7 @@ static int f2fs_rename(struct inode *old_dir, struct dentry *old_dentry, > >>> err = f2fs_add_link(new_dentry, old_inode); > >>> if (err) { > >>> f2fs_unlock_op(sbi); > >>> - goto out_whiteout; > >>> + goto out_dir; > >>> } > >>> > >>> if (old_dir_entry) > >>> @@ -972,7 +973,7 @@ static int f2fs_rename(struct inode *old_dir, struct dentry *old_dentry, > >>> if (IS_ERR(old_page)) > >>> err = PTR_ERR(old_page); > >>> f2fs_unlock_op(sbi); > >>> - goto out_whiteout; > >>> + goto out_dir; > >>> } > >>> } > >>> } > >>> @@ -991,7 +992,6 @@ static int f2fs_rename(struct inode *old_dir, struct dentry *old_dentry, > >>> f2fs_delete_entry(old_entry, old_page, old_dir, NULL); > >>> > >>> if (whiteout) { > >>> - whiteout->i_state |= I_LINKABLE; > >>> set_inode_flag(whiteout, FI_INC_LINK); > >>> err = f2fs_add_link(old_dentry, whiteout); > >> > >> [ 3189.256353] f2fs_do_add_link+0xc5/0x100 [f2fs] > >> [ 3189.258774] f2fs_rename2+0xabf/0x1010 [f2fs] > >> > >> Does the call stack point here? if so, we have set I_LINKABLE before > >> f2fs_add_link(), why the warning still be triggered? > > Am I missing something? Not sure exactly tho, I suspect some races before/after unlock_new_inode(). > > Thanks, > > >> > >> Thanks, > >> > >>> if (err) > >>> @@ -1027,15 +1027,14 @@ static int f2fs_rename(struct inode *old_dir, struct dentry *old_dentry, > >>> f2fs_unlock_op(sbi); > >>> if (new_page) > >>> f2fs_put_page(new_page, 0); > >>> -out_whiteout: > >>> - if (whiteout) > >>> - iput(whiteout); > >>> out_dir: > >>> if (old_dir_entry) > >>> f2fs_put_page(old_dir_page, 0); > >>> out_old: > >>> f2fs_put_page(old_page, 0); > >>> out: > >>> + if (whiteout) > >>> + iput(whiteout); > >>> return err; > >>> } > >>> > >>> > > . > >