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=-16.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS 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 1A327C433ED for ; Fri, 30 Apr 2021 11:37:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B397561077 for ; Fri, 30 Apr 2021 11:37:20 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org B397561077 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:45414 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lcRSR-0000bu-Kk for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Fri, 30 Apr 2021 07:37:19 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:36596) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lcQkt-00045F-I6 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 30 Apr 2021 06:52:20 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([216.205.24.124]:33341) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lcQkn-0002RE-23 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 30 Apr 2021 06:52:18 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1619779932; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=XtC+YiJNW+JtxzMvznROYF1hErGyKKeaSwnCI2MEui0=; b=Qo8u1izs0Ax2gzhF7oK0L3u3KrW2yGNHiMfdwQYT+MKYRob9Ffix6nn7kNH+uVDLabYl/f SRn/YsQscvlrSrmrLM6BxiKI8QOLWfdbk8IZmKjkR2Rreg+FklIlGvQd1bwv3IwR5TACTp fOkOiwCJMVuw4kdDzjjzPC0KLuG+LNY= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-529-EI4nN9XTO_ygdkoNALLLIA-1; Fri, 30 Apr 2021 06:52:10 -0400 X-MC-Unique: EI4nN9XTO_ygdkoNALLLIA-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 19E51107ACE3; Fri, 30 Apr 2021 10:52:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from merkur.fritz.box (ovpn-114-197.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.114.197]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01C6817177; Fri, 30 Apr 2021 10:52:05 +0000 (UTC) From: Kevin Wolf To: qemu-block@nongnu.org Subject: [PULL 09/39] block: bdrv_refresh_perms: check for parents permissions conflict Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2021 12:51:17 +0200 Message-Id: <20210430105147.125840-10-kwolf@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20210430105147.125840-1-kwolf@redhat.com> References: <20210430105147.125840-1-kwolf@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.16 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=kwolf@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Received-SPF: pass client-ip=216.205.24.124; envelope-from=kwolf@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -29 X-Spam_score: -3.0 X-Spam_bar: --- X-Spam_report: (-3.0 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.22, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: kwolf@redhat.com, peter.maydell@linaro.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" From: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy Add additional check that node parents do not interfere with each other. This should not hurt existing callers and allows in further patch use bdrv_refresh_perms() to update a subtree of changed BdrvChild (check that change is correct). New check will substitute bdrv_check_update_perm() in following permissions refactoring, so keep error messages the same to avoid unit test result changes. Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy Reviewed-by: Alberto Garcia Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf Message-Id: <20210428151804.439460-10-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com> Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf --- block.c | 63 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- 1 file changed, 54 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) diff --git a/block.c b/block.c index 34c728d7e4..fd621f0403 100644 --- a/block.c +++ b/block.c @@ -2026,6 +2026,57 @@ bool bdrv_is_writable(BlockDriverState *bs) return bdrv_is_writable_after_reopen(bs, NULL); } +static char *bdrv_child_user_desc(BdrvChild *c) +{ + if (c->klass->get_parent_desc) { + return c->klass->get_parent_desc(c); + } + + return g_strdup("another user"); +} + +static bool bdrv_a_allow_b(BdrvChild *a, BdrvChild *b, Error **errp) +{ + g_autofree char *user = NULL; + g_autofree char *perm_names = NULL; + + if ((b->perm & a->shared_perm) == b->perm) { + return true; + } + + perm_names = bdrv_perm_names(b->perm & ~a->shared_perm); + user = bdrv_child_user_desc(a); + error_setg(errp, "Conflicts with use by %s as '%s', which does not " + "allow '%s' on %s", + user, a->name, perm_names, bdrv_get_node_name(b->bs)); + + return false; +} + +static bool bdrv_parent_perms_conflict(BlockDriverState *bs, Error **errp) +{ + BdrvChild *a, *b; + + /* + * During the loop we'll look at each pair twice. That's correct because + * bdrv_a_allow_b() is asymmetric and we should check each pair in both + * directions. + */ + QLIST_FOREACH(a, &bs->parents, next_parent) { + QLIST_FOREACH(b, &bs->parents, next_parent) { + if (a == b) { + continue; + } + + if (!bdrv_a_allow_b(a, b, errp)) { + return true; + } + } + } + + return false; +} + static void bdrv_child_perm(BlockDriverState *bs, BlockDriverState *child_bs, BdrvChild *c, BdrvChildRole role, BlockReopenQueue *reopen_queue, @@ -2203,15 +2254,6 @@ void bdrv_get_cumulative_perm(BlockDriverState *bs, uint64_t *perm, *shared_perm = cumulative_shared_perms; } -static char *bdrv_child_user_desc(BdrvChild *c) -{ - if (c->klass->get_parent_desc) { - return c->klass->get_parent_desc(c); - } - - return g_strdup("another user"); -} - char *bdrv_perm_names(uint64_t perm) { struct perm_name { @@ -2355,6 +2397,9 @@ static int bdrv_refresh_perms(BlockDriverState *bs, Error **errp) int ret; uint64_t perm, shared_perm; + if (bdrv_parent_perms_conflict(bs, errp)) { + return -EPERM; + } bdrv_get_cumulative_perm(bs, &perm, &shared_perm); ret = bdrv_check_perm(bs, NULL, perm, shared_perm, NULL, errp); if (ret < 0) { -- 2.30.2