From: Nicolai Stange <nicstange@gmail.com>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>,
"Paul E.McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Nicolai Stange <nicstange@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [RFC PATCH 2/9] debugfs: implement per-file removal protection
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2017 11:51:30 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170416095137.2784-3-nicstange@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170416095137.2784-1-nicstange@gmail.com>
Since commit 49d200deaa68 ("debugfs: prevent access to removed files'
private data"), accesses to a file's private data are protected from
concurrent removal by covering all file_operations with a SRCU read section
and sychronizing with those before returning from debugfs_remove() by means
of synchronize_srcu().
As pointed out by Johannes Berg, there are debugfs files with forever
blocking file_operations. Their corresponding SRCU read side sections would
block any debugfs_remove() forever as well, even unrelated ones. This
results in a livelock. Because a remover can't cancel any indefinite
blocking within foreign files, this is a problem.
Resolve this by introducing support for more granular protection on a
per-file basis.
This is implemented by introducing an 'active_users' refcount_t to the
per-file struct debugfs_fsdata state. At file creation time, it is set to
one and a debugfs_remove() will drop that initial reference. The new
debugfs_file_get() and debugfs_file_put(), intended to be used in place of
former debugfs_use_file_start() and debugfs_use_file_finish(), increment
and decrement it respectively. Once the count drops to zero,
debugfs_file_put() will signal a completion which is possibly being waited
for from debugfs_remove().
Thus, as long as there is a debugfs_file_get() not yet matched by a
corresponding debugfs_file_put() around, debugfs_remove() will block.
Actual users of debugfs_use_file_start() and -finish() will get converted
to the new debugfs_file_get() and debugfs_file_put() by followup patches.
Fixes: 49d200deaa68 ("debugfs: prevent access to removed files' private
data")
Reported-by: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Signed-off-by: Nicolai Stange <nicstange@gmail.com>
---
fs/debugfs/file.c | 48 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
fs/debugfs/inode.c | 24 +++++++++++++++++++-----
fs/debugfs/internal.h | 2 ++
include/linux/debugfs.h | 11 +++++++++++
4 files changed, 80 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/debugfs/file.c b/fs/debugfs/file.c
index 15655a1a0704..081d74d390a6 100644
--- a/fs/debugfs/file.c
+++ b/fs/debugfs/file.c
@@ -109,6 +109,54 @@ const struct file_operations *debugfs_real_fops(const struct file *filp)
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(debugfs_real_fops);
+/**
+ * debugfs_file_get - mark the beginning of file data access
+ * @dentry: the dentry object whose data is being accessed.
+ *
+ * Up to a matching call to debugfs_file_put(), any successive call
+ * into the file removing functions debugfs_remove() and
+ * debugfs_remove_recursive() will block. Since associated private
+ * file data may only get freed after a successful return of any of
+ * the removal functions, you may safely access it after a successful
+ * call to debugfs_file_get() without worrying about lifetime issues.
+ *
+ * If -%EIO is returned, the file has already been removed and thus,
+ * it is not safe to access any of its data. If, on the other hand,
+ * it is allowed to access the file data, zero is returned.
+ */
+int debugfs_file_get(struct dentry *dentry)
+{
+ struct debugfs_fsdata *fsd = dentry->d_fsdata;
+
+ /* Avoid starvation of removers. */
+ if (d_unlinked(dentry))
+ return -EIO;
+
+ if (!refcount_inc_not_zero(&fsd->active_users))
+ return -EIO;
+
+ return 0;
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(debugfs_file_get);
+
+/**
+ * debugfs_file_put - mark the end of file data access
+ * @dentry: the dentry object formerly passed to
+ * debugfs_file_get().
+ *
+ * Allow any ongoing concurrent call into debugfs_remove() or
+ * debugfs_remove_recursive() blocked by a former call to
+ * debugfs_file_get() to proceed and return to its caller.
+ */
+void debugfs_file_put(struct dentry *dentry)
+{
+ struct debugfs_fsdata *fsd = dentry->d_fsdata;
+
+ if (refcount_dec_and_test(&fsd->active_users))
+ complete(&fsd->active_users_drained);
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(debugfs_file_put);
+
static int open_proxy_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp)
{
const struct dentry *dentry = F_DENTRY(filp);
diff --git a/fs/debugfs/inode.c b/fs/debugfs/inode.c
index 1ae133064ca1..88d51e666c38 100644
--- a/fs/debugfs/inode.c
+++ b/fs/debugfs/inode.c
@@ -376,6 +376,7 @@ static struct dentry *__debugfs_create_file(const char *name, umode_t mode,
inode->i_fop = proxy_fops;
fsd->real_fops = real_fops;
+ refcount_set(&fsd->active_users, 1);
dentry->d_fsdata = fsd;
d_instantiate(dentry, inode);
@@ -633,18 +634,31 @@ struct dentry *debugfs_create_symlink(const char *name, struct dentry *parent,
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(debugfs_create_symlink);
+static void __debugfs_remove_file(struct dentry *dentry, struct dentry *parent)
+{
+ struct debugfs_fsdata *fsd;
+
+ simple_unlink(d_inode(parent), dentry);
+ d_delete(dentry);
+ fsd = dentry->d_fsdata;
+ init_completion(&fsd->active_users_drained);
+ if (!refcount_dec_and_test(&fsd->active_users))
+ wait_for_completion(&fsd->active_users_drained);
+}
+
static int __debugfs_remove(struct dentry *dentry, struct dentry *parent)
{
int ret = 0;
if (simple_positive(dentry)) {
dget(dentry);
- if (d_is_dir(dentry))
+ if (d_is_dir(dentry)) {
ret = simple_rmdir(d_inode(parent), dentry);
- else
- simple_unlink(d_inode(parent), dentry);
- if (!ret)
- d_delete(dentry);
+ if (!ret)
+ d_delete(dentry);
+ } else {
+ __debugfs_remove_file(dentry, parent);
+ }
dput(dentry);
}
return ret;
diff --git a/fs/debugfs/internal.h b/fs/debugfs/internal.h
index 512601eed3ce..0eea99432840 100644
--- a/fs/debugfs/internal.h
+++ b/fs/debugfs/internal.h
@@ -21,6 +21,8 @@ extern const struct file_operations debugfs_full_proxy_file_operations;
struct debugfs_fsdata {
const struct file_operations *real_fops;
+ refcount_t active_users;
+ struct completion active_users_drained;
};
#endif /* _DEBUGFS_INTERNAL_H_ */
diff --git a/include/linux/debugfs.h b/include/linux/debugfs.h
index d614be21412a..d1f1104c41ee 100644
--- a/include/linux/debugfs.h
+++ b/include/linux/debugfs.h
@@ -98,6 +98,9 @@ void debugfs_use_file_finish(int srcu_idx) __releases(&debugfs_srcu);
const struct file_operations *debugfs_real_fops(const struct file *filp)
__must_hold(&debugfs_srcu);
+int debugfs_file_get(struct dentry *dentry);
+void debugfs_file_put(struct dentry *dentry);
+
ssize_t debugfs_attr_read(struct file *file, char __user *buf,
size_t len, loff_t *ppos);
ssize_t debugfs_attr_write(struct file *file, const char __user *buf,
@@ -228,6 +231,14 @@ static inline void debugfs_use_file_finish(int srcu_idx)
__releases(&debugfs_srcu)
{ }
+static inline int debugfs_file_get(struct dentry *dentry)
+{
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static inline void debugfs_file_put(struct dentry *dentry)
+{ }
+
static inline ssize_t debugfs_attr_read(struct file *file, char __user *buf,
size_t len, loff_t *ppos)
{
--
2.12.2
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-04-16 9:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-23 14:54 deadlock in synchronize_srcu() in debugfs? Johannes Berg
2017-03-23 15:29 ` Johannes Berg
2017-03-24 8:56 ` Johannes Berg
2017-03-24 9:24 ` Johannes Berg
2017-03-24 17:45 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-03-24 18:51 ` Johannes Berg
2017-03-24 19:33 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-03-24 20:20 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-03-27 11:18 ` Johannes Berg
2017-03-23 15:36 ` Nicolai Stange
2017-03-23 15:47 ` Johannes Berg
2017-03-27 11:36 ` Johannes Berg
2017-03-30 7:32 ` Nicolai Stange
2017-03-30 7:55 ` Johannes Berg
2017-03-30 10:27 ` Nicolai Stange
2017-03-30 11:11 ` Johannes Berg
2017-03-31 9:03 ` Nicolai Stange
2017-03-31 9:44 ` Johannes Berg
2017-04-16 9:51 ` [RFC PATCH 0/9] debugfs: per-file removal protection Nicolai Stange
2017-04-16 9:51 ` [RFC PATCH 1/9] debugfs: add support for more elaborate ->d_fsdata Nicolai Stange
2017-04-16 9:51 ` Nicolai Stange [this message]
2017-04-18 2:23 ` [lkp-robot] [debugfs] f3e7155d08: BUG:unable_to_handle_kernel kernel test robot
2017-04-23 18:37 ` Nicolai Stange
2017-04-24 6:36 ` Ye Xiaolong
2017-04-16 9:51 ` [RFC PATCH 3/9] debugfs: debugfs_real_fops(): drop __must_hold sparse annotation Nicolai Stange
2017-04-16 9:51 ` [RFC PATCH 4/9] debugfs: convert to debugfs_file_get() and -put() Nicolai Stange
2017-04-16 9:51 ` [RFC PATCH 5/9] IB/hfi1: " Nicolai Stange
2017-04-16 9:51 ` [RFC PATCH 6/9] debugfs: purge obsolete SRCU based removal protection Nicolai Stange
2017-04-16 9:51 ` [RFC PATCH 7/9] debugfs: call debugfs_real_fops() only after debugfs_file_get() Nicolai Stange
2017-04-16 9:51 ` [RFC PATCH 8/9] debugfs: defer debugfs_fsdata allocation to first usage Nicolai Stange
2017-04-18 9:36 ` Johannes Berg
2017-05-02 20:05 ` Nicolai Stange
2017-05-03 5:43 ` Johannes Berg
2017-04-16 9:51 ` [RFC PATCH 9/9] debugfs: free debugfs_fsdata instances Nicolai Stange
2017-04-17 16:01 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-04-18 9:39 ` Johannes Berg
2017-04-18 13:31 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-04-18 13:40 ` Johannes Berg
2017-04-18 15:17 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-04-18 15:20 ` Johannes Berg
2017-04-18 17:19 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-03-23 15:37 ` deadlock in synchronize_srcu() in debugfs? Paul E. McKenney
2017-03-23 15:46 ` Johannes Berg
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=20170416095137.2784-3-nicstange@gmail.com \
--to=nicstange@gmail.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
/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