From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>, Qian Cai <cai@redhat.com>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] fs: Fix memory leaks in do_renameat2() error paths
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 14:39:32 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3abc1742-733e-c682-5476-c6337a630e05@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d77e2d82-22da-a7a0-54e0-f5d315f32a75@kernel.dk>
On 11/2/20 1:31 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 11/2/20 1:12 PM, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> writes:
>>
>>> On 11/2/20 12:27 PM, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>>>> Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On 10/30/20 4:22 PM, Al Viro wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 02:33:11PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>>>>>> On 10/30/20 12:49 PM, Al Viro wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 12:46:26PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> See other reply, it's being posted soon, just haven't gotten there yet
>>>>>>>>> and it wasn't ready.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It's a prep patch so we can call do_renameat2 and pass in a filename
>>>>>>>>> instead. The intent is not to have any functional changes in that prep
>>>>>>>>> patch. But once we can pass in filenames instead of user pointers, it's
>>>>>>>>> usable from io_uring.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You do realize that pathname resolution is *NOT* offloadable to helper
>>>>>>>> threads, I hope...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How so? If we have all the necessary context assigned, what's preventing
>>>>>>> it from working?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Semantics of /proc/self/..., for starters (and things like /proc/mounts, etc.
>>>>>> *do* pass through that, /dev/stdin included)
>>>>>
>>>>> Don't we just need ->thread_pid for that to work?
>>>>
>>>> No. You need ->signal.
>>>>
>>>> You need ->signal->pids[PIDTYPE_TGID]. It is only for /proc/thread-self
>>>> that ->thread_pid is needed.
>>>>
>>>> Even more so than ->thread_pid, it is a kernel invariant that ->signal
>>>> does not change.
>>>
>>> I don't care about the pid itself, my suggestion was to assign ->thread_pid
>>> over the lookup operation to ensure that /proc/self/ worked the way that
>>> you'd expect.
>>
>> I understand that.
>>
>> However /proc/self/ refers to the current process not to the current
>> thread. So ->thread_pid is not what you need to assign to make that
>> happen. What the code looks at is: ->signal->pids[PIDTYPE_TGID].
>>
>> It will definitely break invariants to assign to ->signal.
>>
>> Currently only exchange_tids assigns ->thread_pid and it is nasty. It
>> results in code that potentially results in infinite loops in
>> kernel/signal.c
>>
>> To my knowledge nothing assigns ->signal->pids[PIDTYPE_TGID]. At best
>> it might work but I expect the it would completely confuse something in
>> the pid to task or pid to process mappings. Which is to say even if it
>> does work it would be an extremely fragile solution.
>
> Thanks Eric, that's useful. Sounds to me like we're better off, at least
> for now, to just expressly forbid async lookup of /proc/self/. Which
> isn't really the end of the world as far as I'm concerned.
Alternatively, we just teach task_pid_ptr() where to look for an
alternate, if current->flags & PF_IO_WORKER is true. Then we don't have
to assign anything that's visible in task_struct, and in fact the async
worker can retain this stuff on the stack. As all requests are killed
before a task is allowed to exit, that should be safe.
diff --git a/kernel/pid.c b/kernel/pid.c
index 74ddbff1a6ba..5fd421a4864c 100644
--- a/kernel/pid.c
+++ b/kernel/pid.c
@@ -42,6 +42,7 @@
#include <linux/sched/signal.h>
#include <linux/sched/task.h>
#include <linux/idr.h>
+#include <linux/io_uring.h>
#include <net/sock.h>
#include <uapi/linux/pidfd.h>
@@ -320,6 +321,12 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(find_vpid);
static struct pid **task_pid_ptr(struct task_struct *task, enum pid_type type)
{
+ if ((task->flags & PF_IO_WORKER) && task->io_uring) {
+ return (type == PIDTYPE_PID) ?
+ &task->io_uring->thread_pid :
+ &task->io_uring->pids[type];
+ }
+
return (type == PIDTYPE_PID) ?
&task->thread_pid :
&task->signal->pids[type];
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-11-02 21:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-10-30 15:24 Qian Cai
2020-10-30 15:27 ` Jens Axboe
2020-10-30 15:52 ` Qian Cai
2020-10-30 16:49 ` Jens Axboe
2020-10-30 18:42 ` Al Viro
2020-10-30 18:46 ` Jens Axboe
2020-10-30 18:49 ` Al Viro
2020-10-30 20:33 ` Jens Axboe
2020-10-30 22:22 ` Al Viro
2020-10-30 23:21 ` Jens Axboe
2020-11-02 18:43 ` Eric W. Biederman
2020-11-02 19:27 ` Eric W. Biederman
2020-11-02 19:54 ` Jens Axboe
2020-11-02 20:12 ` Eric W. Biederman
2020-11-02 20:31 ` Jens Axboe
2020-11-02 21:39 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2020-11-03 14:45 ` Eric W. Biederman
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=3abc1742-733e-c682-5476-c6337a630e05@kernel.dk \
--to=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=cai@redhat.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®