linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ian Kent <raven@themaw.net>
To: Justin Forbes <jmforbes@linuxtx.org>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
	autofs mailing list <autofs@vger.kernel.org>,
	Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] autofs: fix wait name hash calculation in autofs_wait()
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2021 08:08:22 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2449a6ad3ea38087d546279ac5a483e5c718a2b3.camel@themaw.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFxkdAraAe37_5bGLJtTtxZCaKTqgVPh4hTbcVC=08vRt-Zizg@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, 2021-10-14 at 10:11 -0500, Justin Forbes wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 2:20 AM Ian Kent <raven@themaw.net> wrote:
> > 
> > There's a mistake in commit 2be7828c9fefc ("get rid of
> > autofs_getpath()")
> > that affects kernels from v5.13.0, basically missed because of me
> > not
> > fully testing the change for Al.
> > 
> > The problem is that the hash calculation for the wait name qstr
> > hasn't
> > been updated to account for the change to use dentry_path_raw().
> > This
> > prevents the correct matching an existing wait resulting in
> > multiple
> > notifications being sent to the daemon for the same mount which
> > must
> > not occur.
> > 
> > The problem wasn't discovered earlier because it only occurs when
> > multiple processes trigger a request for the same mount
> > concurrently
> > so it only shows up in more aggressive testing.
> 
> I suppose it shows up in more than just testing, as we have a bug
> where this is impacting a user doing regular desktop things.

Yes, but what the patch description is talking about is my not
discovering the problem when I tested the original change.

I have a similar Fedora bug too but that came in some time after
I discovered the problem when testing a new autofs release.

All it takes is multiple processes concurrently triggering an
autofs automount point. Because the qstr hash doesn't match
duplicate mount requests are sent to the daemon which is a
problem.

> 
> Justin
> 
> > Fixes: 2be7828c9fefc ("get rid of autofs_getpath()")
> > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> > Signed-off-by: Ian Kent <raven@themaw.net>
> > ---
> >  fs/autofs/waitq.c |    2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/fs/autofs/waitq.c b/fs/autofs/waitq.c
> > index 16b5fca0626e..54c1f8b8b075 100644
> > --- a/fs/autofs/waitq.c
> > +++ b/fs/autofs/waitq.c
> > @@ -358,7 +358,7 @@ int autofs_wait(struct autofs_sb_info *sbi,
> >                 qstr.len = strlen(p);
> >                 offset = p - name;
> >         }
> > -       qstr.hash = full_name_hash(dentry, name, qstr.len);
> > +       qstr.hash = full_name_hash(dentry, qstr.name, qstr.len);
> > 
> >         if (mutex_lock_interruptible(&sbi->wq_mutex)) {
> >                 kfree(name);
> > 
> > 



      reply	other threads:[~2021-10-15  0:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-09-23  7:13 [PATCH] autofs: fix wait name hash calculation in autofs_wait() Ian Kent
2021-10-14 15:11 ` Justin Forbes
2021-10-15  0:08   ` Ian Kent [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=2449a6ad3ea38087d546279ac5a483e5c718a2b3.camel@themaw.net \
    --to=raven@themaw.net \
    --cc=autofs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=jmforbes@linuxtx.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@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).