public inbox for [email protected]
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Al Viro <[email protected]>
To: Christian Brauner <[email protected]>
Cc: Jens Axboe <[email protected]>,
	syzbot <[email protected]>,
	[email protected], [email protected],
	[email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: [syzbot] WARNING in mntput_no_expire (2)
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2021 19:11:12 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210401175919.jpiylhfrlb4xb67u@wittgenstein>

On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 07:59:19PM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote:

> I _think_ I see what the issue is. It seems that an assumption made in
> this commit might be wrong and we're missing a mnt_add_count() bump that
> we would otherwise have gotten if we've moved the failure handling into
> the unlazy helpers themselves.
> 
> Al, does that sound plausible?

mnt_add_count() on _what_?  Failure in legitimize_links() ends up with
nd->path.mnt zeroed, in both callers.  So which vfsmount would be
affected?

Rules:
	in RCU mode: no mounts pinned
	out of RCU mode: nd->path.mnt and all nd->stack[i].link.mnt for
			i below nd->depth are either NULL or pinned

Transition from RCU to non-RCU mode happens in try_to_unlazy() and
try_to_unlazy_next().

References (if any) are dropped by eventual terminate_walk() (after
that the contents of nameidata is junk).

__legitimize_mnt() is the primitive for pinning.  Return values:
	0 -- successfully pinned (or given NULL as an argument)
	1 -- failed, refcount not affected
	-1 -- failed, refcount bumped.
It stays in RCU mode in all cases.

One user is __legitimize_path(); it also stays in RCU mode.  If it
fails to legitimize path->mnt, it will zero it *IF* __legitimize_mnt()
reports that refcount hadn't been taken.  In all other cases,
path->mnt is pinned.  IOW, the caller is responsible for path_put()
regardless of the outcome.

Another user is legitimize_mnt().  _That_ will make sure that
refcount is unaffected in case of failure (IOW, if __legitimize_mnt()
reports failure with refcount bumped, we drop out of RCU mode,
do mntput() and go back).

On failure in legitimize_links() we either leave nd->depth equal to zero
(in which case all nd->stack[...].link.mnt are to be ignored) or
we set it one higher than the last attempted legitimize_path() in there.
In the latter case, all entries in nd->stack below the value we put into
nd->depth had legitimize_path() called (and thus have ->mnt either NULL
or pinned) and everything starting from nd->depth is to be ignored.

nd->path handling:
1) Callers of legitimize_links() are responsible for zeroing nd->path.mnt
on legitimize_links() failure.  Both do that, AFAICS.
2) in try_to_unlazy() we proceed to call legitimize_path() on nd->path.
Once that call is done, we have nd->path.mnt pinned or NULL, so nothing
further is needed with it.
3) in try_to_unlazy_next() we use legitimize_mnt() instead.  Failure
of that is handled by zeroing nd->path.mnt; success means that nd->path.mnt
is pinned and should be left alone.

We could use __legitimize_mnt() in try_to_unlazy_next() (basically,
substitute the body of legitimize_mnt() there and massage it a bit),
but that ends up being harder to follow:
	res = __legitimize_mnt(nd->path.mnt, nd->m_seq);
	if (unlikely(res)) {
		if (res < 0)	// pinned, leave it there
			goto out1;
		else		// not pinned, zero it
			goto out2;
	}
instead of
        if (unlikely(!legitimize_mnt(nd->path.mnt, nd->m_seq)))
		goto out2;
we have now.

  reply	other threads:[~2021-04-01 19:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <[email protected]>
2021-04-01 15:45 ` [syzbot] WARNING in mntput_no_expire (2) Christian Brauner
2021-04-01 16:09   ` Jens Axboe
2021-04-01 17:46     ` Christian Brauner
2021-04-01 17:59       ` Christian Brauner
2021-04-01 19:11         ` Al Viro [this message]
2021-04-04  2:34           ` Al Viro
2021-04-04  2:38             ` Al Viro
2021-04-04 11:34             ` Christian Brauner
2021-04-04 15:56               ` Al Viro
2021-04-04 16:40                 ` Christian Brauner
2021-04-04 16:44                   ` Al Viro
2021-04-04 17:05                     ` Christian Brauner
2021-04-04 18:50                       ` Al Viro
2021-04-04 20:17                         ` Al Viro
2021-04-05 11:44                           ` Christian Brauner
2021-04-05 16:18                             ` Al Viro
2021-04-05 17:08                               ` Christian Brauner
2021-04-05 18:23                                 ` Al Viro
2021-04-05 18:28                                   ` Al Viro
2021-04-05 20:07                                     ` Christian Brauner
2021-04-06  1:38                                       ` Al Viro
2021-04-06  2:24                                         ` Al Viro
2021-04-06 12:35                                         ` Christian Brauner
2021-04-06 13:13                                           ` Al Viro
2021-04-06 13:22                                             ` Christian Brauner
2021-04-06 14:15                                               ` Al Viro
2021-04-06 14:23                                                 ` Al Viro
2021-04-06 15:37                                                   ` Jens Axboe
2021-04-06 14:46                                                 ` Christian Brauner
2021-04-04 16:52                   ` Christian Brauner
2021-04-04 16:55                     ` Christian Brauner

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 \
    [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