mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: Jeff Layton <jlayton@poochiereds.net>,
	Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>,
	Eric Paris <eparis@redhat.com>, Eryu Guan <eguan@redhat.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] fsnotify: handle permission events without holding fsnotify_mark_srcu[0]
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2016 13:48:27 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1479124107-8477-3-git-send-email-amir73il@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1479124107-8477-1-git-send-email-amir73il@gmail.com>

Handling fanotify events does not entail dereferencing fsnotify_mark
beyond the point of fanotify_should_send_event().

For the case of permission events, which may block indefinitely,
return -EAGAIN and then fsnotify() will call handle_event() again
without a reference to the mark.

Without a reference to the mark, there is no need to call
handle_event() under fsnotify_mark_srcu[0] read side lock,
so we drop fsnotify_mark_srcu[0] while handling the event
and grab it back before continuing to the next mark.

After this change, a blocking permission event will no longer
block closing of any file descriptors of 0 priority groups,
i.e: inotify and fanotify groups of class FAN_CLASS_NOTIF.

Reported-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
Signed-off-by: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
---
 fs/notify/fanotify/fanotify.c | 15 +++++++++++----
 fs/notify/fsnotify.c          | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/notify/fanotify/fanotify.c b/fs/notify/fanotify/fanotify.c
index e0e5f7c..c7689ad 100644
--- a/fs/notify/fanotify/fanotify.c
+++ b/fs/notify/fanotify/fanotify.c
@@ -176,7 +176,7 @@ init: __maybe_unused
 static int fanotify_handle_event(struct fsnotify_group *group,
 				 struct inode *inode,
 				 struct fsnotify_mark *inode_mark,
-				 struct fsnotify_mark *fanotify_mark,
+				 struct fsnotify_mark *vfsmnt_mark,
 				 u32 mask, void *data, int data_type,
 				 const unsigned char *file_name, u32 cookie)
 {
@@ -195,9 +195,16 @@ static int fanotify_handle_event(struct fsnotify_group *group,
 	BUILD_BUG_ON(FAN_ACCESS_PERM != FS_ACCESS_PERM);
 	BUILD_BUG_ON(FAN_ONDIR != FS_ISDIR);
 
-	if (!fanotify_should_send_event(inode_mark, fanotify_mark, mask, data,
-					data_type))
-		return 0;
+	if (inode_mark || vfsmnt_mark) {
+		if (!fanotify_should_send_event(inode_mark, vfsmnt_mark, mask,
+						data, data_type))
+			return 0;
+#ifdef CONFIG_FANOTIFY_ACCESS_PERMISSIONS
+		/* Ask to be called again without a reference to mark */
+		if (mask & FAN_ALL_PERM_EVENTS)
+			return -EAGAIN;
+#endif
+	}
 
 	pr_debug("%s: group=%p inode=%p mask=%x\n", __func__, group, inode,
 		 mask);
diff --git a/fs/notify/fsnotify.c b/fs/notify/fsnotify.c
index af5c523a..5b9a248 100644
--- a/fs/notify/fsnotify.c
+++ b/fs/notify/fsnotify.c
@@ -291,6 +291,29 @@ int fsnotify(struct inode *to_tell, __u32 mask, void *data, int data_is,
 		ret = send_to_group(to_tell, inode_mark, vfsmount_mark, mask,
 				    data, data_is, cookie, file_name);
 
+		/*
+		 * If handle_event() is going to block, we call it again
+		 * witout holding fsnotify_mark_srcu[0], which is protecting
+		 * the low priority mark lists.
+		 * We are still holding fsnotify_mark_srcu[1], which
+		 * is protecting the high priority marks in the first half
+		 * of the mark list, which is where we are at.
+		 */
+		if (group->priority > 0 && ret == -EAGAIN) {
+			srcu_read_unlock(&fsnotify_mark_srcu[0], idx);
+
+			ret = group->ops->handle_event(group, to_tell,
+						       NULL, NULL,
+						       mask, data, data_is,
+						       file_name, cookie);
+
+			/*
+			 * We need to hold fsnotify_mark_srcu[0], because
+			 * next mark may be low priority.
+			 */
+			idx = srcu_read_lock(&fsnotify_mark_srcu[0]);
+		}
+
 		if (ret && (mask & ALL_FSNOTIFY_PERM_EVENTS))
 			goto out;
 
-- 
2.7.4

  parent reply	other threads:[~2016-11-14 11:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-11-14 11:48 [RFC][PATCH 0/2] fsnotify: reduce coupling of permission and non permission events Amir Goldstein
2016-11-14 11:48 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/2] fsnotify: separate fsnotify_mark_srcu for groups with " Amir Goldstein
2016-11-14 11:48 ` Amir Goldstein [this message]
2016-11-14 13:20   ` [RFC][PATCH 2/2] fsnotify: handle permission events without holding fsnotify_mark_srcu[0] Jan Kara
2016-11-14 15:09     ` Amir Goldstein
2016-11-16  9:35       ` Jan Kara

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=1479124107-8477-3-git-send-email-amir73il@gmail.com \
    --to=amir73il@gmail.com \
    --cc=eguan@redhat.com \
    --cc=eparis@redhat.com \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=jlayton@poochiereds.net \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
    /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

Powered by JetHome