From: Al Viro <[email protected]>
To: Mateusz Guzik <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs: support filename refcount without atomics
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2025 16:42:16 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250307164216.GI2023217@ZenIV> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
On Fri, Mar 07, 2025 at 05:11:55PM +0100, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
> Atomics are only needed for a combination of io_uring and audit.
>
> Regular file access (even with audit) gets around fine without them.
>
> With this patch 'struct filename' starts with being refcounted using
> regular ops.
>
> In order to avoid API explosion in the getname*() family, a dedicated
> routine is added to switch the obj to use atomics.
>
> This leaves the room for merely issuing getname(), not issuing the
> switch and still trying to manipulate the refcount from another thread.
>
> Catching such cases is facilitated by CONFIG_DEBUG_VFS-dependent
> tracking of who created the given filename object and having refname()
> and putname() detect if another thread is trying to modify them.
Not a good way to handle that, IMO.
Atomics do hurt there, but they are only plastering over the real
problem - names formed in one thread, inserted into audit context
there and operation involving them happening in a different thread.
Refcounting avoids an instant memory corruption, but the real PITA
is in audit users of that stuff.
IMO we should *NOT* grab an audit names slot at getname() time -
that ought to be done explicitly at later points.
The obstacle is that currently there still are several retry loop
with getname() done in it; I've most of that dealt with, need to
finish that series.
And yes, refcount becomes non-atomic as the result.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-03-07 16:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-03-07 16:11 [PATCH] fs: support filename refcount without atomics Mateusz Guzik
2025-03-07 16:18 ` Jens Axboe
2025-03-07 16:25 ` Mateusz Guzik
2025-03-07 16:32 ` Jens Axboe
2025-03-07 16:35 ` Mateusz Guzik
2025-03-07 16:38 ` Jens Axboe
2025-03-07 16:39 ` Mateusz Guzik
2025-03-07 16:26 ` Matthew Wilcox
2025-03-07 16:32 ` Mateusz Guzik
2025-03-07 16:42 ` Al Viro [this message]
2025-03-07 16:44 ` Mateusz Guzik
2025-03-07 22:58 ` Mateusz Guzik
2025-03-08 13:35 ` kernel test robot
2025-03-08 13:46 ` kernel test robot
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=20250307164216.GI2023217@ZenIV \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
/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