|
Message-ID: <20200212142637.dhcrgy252qw6eg42@comp-core-i7-2640m-0182e6> Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2020 15:26:38 +0100 From: Alexey Gladkov <gladkov.alexey@...il.com> To: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk> Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>, Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>, Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Security Module <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>, Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@...il.com>, Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, Daniel Micay <danielmicay@...il.com>, Djalal Harouni <tixxdz@...il.com>, "Dmitry V . Levin" <ldv@...linux.org>, "Eric W . Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, "J . Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>, Jeff Layton <jlayton@...chiereds.net>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 07/11] proc: flush task dcache entries from all procfs instances On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 10:45:53PM +0000, Al Viro wrote: > On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 04:05:15PM +0100, Alexey Gladkov wrote: > > This allows to flush dcache entries of a task on multiple procfs mounts > > per pid namespace. > > > > The RCU lock is used because the number of reads at the task exit time > > is much larger than the number of procfs mounts. > > > > Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> > > Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org> > > Signed-off-by: Djalal Harouni <tixxdz@...il.com> > > Suggested-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> > > Signed-off-by: Alexey Gladkov <gladkov.alexey@...il.com> > > --- > > fs/proc/base.c | 20 +++++++++++++++----- > > fs/proc/root.c | 27 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > > include/linux/pid_namespace.h | 2 ++ > > include/linux/proc_fs.h | 2 ++ > > 4 files changed, 45 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/fs/proc/base.c b/fs/proc/base.c > > index 4ccb280a3e79..24b7c620ded3 100644 > > --- a/fs/proc/base.c > > +++ b/fs/proc/base.c > > @@ -3133,7 +3133,7 @@ static const struct inode_operations proc_tgid_base_inode_operations = { > > .permission = proc_pid_permission, > > }; > > > > -static void proc_flush_task_mnt(struct vfsmount *mnt, pid_t pid, pid_t tgid) > > +static void proc_flush_task_mnt_root(struct dentry *mnt_root, pid_t pid, pid_t tgid) > > { > > struct dentry *dentry, *leader, *dir; > > char buf[10 + 1]; > > @@ -3142,7 +3142,7 @@ static void proc_flush_task_mnt(struct vfsmount *mnt, pid_t pid, pid_t tgid) > > name.name = buf; > > name.len = snprintf(buf, sizeof(buf), "%u", pid); > > /* no ->d_hash() rejects on procfs */ > > - dentry = d_hash_and_lookup(mnt->mnt_root, &name); > > + dentry = d_hash_and_lookup(mnt_root, &name); > > if (dentry) { > > d_invalidate(dentry); > ... which can block > > dput(dentry); > ... and so can this > > > + rcu_read_lock(); > > + list_for_each_entry_rcu(fs_info, &upid->ns->proc_mounts, pidns_entry) { > > + mnt_root = fs_info->m_super->s_root; > > + proc_flush_task_mnt_root(mnt_root, upid->nr, tgid->numbers[i].nr); > > ... making that more than slightly unsafe. I see. So, I can't use rcu locks here as well as spinlocks. Thanks! -- Rgrds, legion
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.