From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S965578AbcBCS02 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 3 Feb 2016 13:26:28 -0500
Received: from mail-yk0-f174.google.com ([209.85.160.174]:33202 "EHLO
	mail-yk0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S965227AbcBCS0Z (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 3 Feb 2016 13:26:25 -0500
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2016 13:26:21 -0500
From: Jeff Layton <jlayton@poochiereds.net>
To: William Dauchy <wdauchy@gmail.com>
Cc: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
        "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        syzkaller <syzkaller@googlegroups.com>,
        Kostya Serebryany <kcc@google.com>,
        Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>,
        Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@oracle.com>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Subject: Re: fs: WARNING in locks_free_lock_context()
Message-ID: <20160203132621.27675437@synchrony.poochiereds.net>
In-Reply-To: <CAJ75kXaJd0NJO8T3t30+PyApVV-v8OWwzrry2xsp=KUeeWi-uQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACT4Y+YpBv-nRZsZmP674kU1e8V4Qt71hcfWXu-ZF80xxidDmQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<20151223085428.69ac2522@tlielax.poochiereds.net>
	<CAJ75kXaJd0NJO8T3t30+PyApVV-v8OWwzrry2xsp=KUeeWi-uQ@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.13.1 (GTK+ 2.24.29; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 19:19:37 +0100
William Dauchy <wdauchy@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello Jeff,
> 
> On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 2:54 PM, Jeff Layton <jlayton@poochiereds.net> wrote:
> > Ooh, nice catch...and just in time for Christmas.
> >
> > filp_close does this after the fd has been detached from the file table
> > in __close_fd:
> >
> >         if (likely(!(filp->f_mode & FMODE_PATH))) {
> >                 dnotify_flush(filp, id);
> >                 locks_remove_posix(filp, id);
> >         }
> >         fput(filp);
> >
> > ...and fcntl_setlk does this:
> >
> >         /*
> >          * Attempt to detect a close/fcntl race and recover by
> >          * releasing the lock that was just acquired.
> >          */
> >         /*
> >          * we need that spin_lock here - it prevents reordering between
> >          * update of i_flctx->flc_posix and check for it done in close().
> >          * rcu_read_lock() wouldn't do.
> >          */
> >         spin_lock(&current->files->file_lock);
> >         f = fcheck(fd);
> >         spin_unlock(&current->files->file_lock);
> >         if (!error && f != filp && flock.l_type != F_UNLCK) {
> >                 flock.l_type = F_UNLCK;
> >                 goto again;
> >         }
> >
> > ...so in principle that should keep new locks from racing onto the list
> > just after we call filp_close. Hmm...I'll see if I can reproduce and
> > figure out how this could happen.  
> 
> Just wondering if you had the time to figure out this warning?
> 
> Thanks,

Yes...this commit in mainline fixes it:

commit 7f3697e24dc3820b10f445a4a7d914fc356012d1
Author: Jeff Layton <jeff.layton@primarydata.com>
Date:   Thu Jan 7 16:38:10 2016 -0500

    locks: fix unlock when fcntl_setlk races with a close


...and the patch is applicable to all kernels currently in circulation.
The original bug is very old (from 2005).

-- 
Jeff Layton <jlayton@poochiereds.net>