linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: 黄乐 <huangle1@jd.com>
To: "bfields@fieldses.org" <bfields@fieldses.org>,
	"jlayton@kernel.org" <jlayton@kernel.org>,
	"linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org" <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH] nfsd4: fix a deadlock on state owner replay mutex
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2019 18:30:27 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <720b91b1204b4c73be1b6ec2ff44dbab@jd.com> (raw)

from: Huang Le <huangle1@jd.com>

In move_to_close_lru(), which only be called on path of nfsd4 CLOSE op,
the code could wait for its stid ref count drop to 2 while holding its
state owner replay mutex.  However, the other stid ref holder (normally
a parallel CLOSE op) that move_to_close_lru() is waiting for might be
accquiring the same replay mutex.

This patch fix the issue by clearing the replay owner before waiting, and
assign it back after then.

Signed-off-by: Huang Le <huangle1@jd.com>
---

I guess we should cc this patch to stable tree, since a malicious client
could craft parallel CLOSE ops to put all nfsd tasks in D state shortly.

diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
index 618e660..5f6a48f 100644
--- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
+++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c
@@ -3829,12 +3829,12 @@ static void nfs4_free_openowner(struct nfs4_stateowner *so)
  * them before returning however.
  */
 static void
-move_to_close_lru(struct nfs4_ol_stateid *s, struct net *net)
+move_to_close_lru(struct nfsd4_compound_state *cstate, struct nfs4_ol_stateid *s,
+		struct net *net)
 {
 	struct nfs4_ol_stateid *last;
 	struct nfs4_openowner *oo = openowner(s->st_stateowner);
-	struct nfsd_net *nn = net_generic(s->st_stid.sc_client->net,
-						nfsd_net_id);
+	struct nfsd_net *nn = net_generic(net, nfsd_net_id);
 
 	dprintk("NFSD: move_to_close_lru nfs4_openowner %p\n", oo);
 
@@ -3846,8 +3846,19 @@ static void nfs4_free_openowner(struct nfs4_stateowner *so)
 	 * Wait for the refcount to drop to 2. Since it has been unhashed,
 	 * there should be no danger of the refcount going back up again at
 	 * this point.
+	 *
+	 * Before waiting, we clear cstate->replay_owner to release its
+	 * so_replay.rp_mutex, since other reference holder might be accquiring
+	 * the same mutex before they could drop the references.  The replay_owner
+	 * can be assigned back safely after they done their jobs.
 	 */
-	wait_event(close_wq, refcount_read(&s->st_stid.sc_count) == 2);
+	if (refcount_read(&s->st_stid.sc_count) != 2) {
+		struct nfs4_stateowner *so = cstate->replay_owner;
+
+		nfsd4_cstate_clear_replay(cstate);
+		wait_event(close_wq, refcount_read(&s->st_stid.sc_count) == 2);
+		nfsd4_cstate_assign_replay(cstate, so);
+	}
 
 	release_all_access(s);
 	if (s->st_stid.sc_file) {
@@ -5531,7 +5542,8 @@ static inline void nfs4_stateid_downgrade(struct nfs4_ol_stateid *stp, u32 to_ac
 	return status;
 }
 
-static void nfsd4_close_open_stateid(struct nfs4_ol_stateid *s)
+static void nfsd4_close_open_stateid(struct nfsd4_compound_state *cstate,
+		struct nfs4_ol_stateid *s)
 {
 	struct nfs4_client *clp = s->st_stid.sc_client;
 	bool unhashed;
@@ -5549,7 +5561,7 @@ static void nfsd4_close_open_stateid(struct nfs4_ol_stateid *s)
 		spin_unlock(&clp->cl_lock);
 		free_ol_stateid_reaplist(&reaplist);
 		if (unhashed)
-			move_to_close_lru(s, clp->net);
+			move_to_close_lru(cstate, s, clp->net);
 	}
 }
 
@@ -5587,7 +5599,7 @@ static void nfsd4_close_open_stateid(struct nfs4_ol_stateid *s)
 	 */
 	nfs4_inc_and_copy_stateid(&close->cl_stateid, &stp->st_stid);
 
-	nfsd4_close_open_stateid(stp);
+	nfsd4_close_open_stateid(cstate, stp);
 	mutex_unlock(&stp->st_mutex);
 
 	/* v4.1+ suggests that we send a special stateid in here, since the

             reply	other threads:[~2019-06-27 18:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-06-27 18:30 黄乐 [this message]
2019-07-10  0:03 ` [PATCH] nfsd4: fix a deadlock on state owner replay mutex bfields
2019-07-10 18:43   ` 黄乐
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2019-06-27 18:16 黄乐

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=720b91b1204b4c73be1b6ec2ff44dbab@jd.com \
    --to=huangle1@jd.com \
    --cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
    --cc=jlayton@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
    /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).