From: Waiman Long <llong@redhat.com>
To: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>, Waiman Long <llong@redhat.com>
Cc: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>, Eric Paris <eparis@redhat.com>,
Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, audit@vger.kernel.org,
Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@redhat.com>,
Ricardo Robaina <rrobaina@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] audit: Avoid excessive dput/dget in audit_context setup and reset paths
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2026 22:03:33 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <cbaab46e-715d-4d06-80af-320caec7feb7@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260204201815.GP3183987@ZenIV>
On 2/4/26 3:18 PM, Al Viro wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 04, 2026 at 01:16:15PM -0500, Waiman Long wrote:
>
>
>> Thanks for the detailed explanation. I am thinking about something like
>> the code diff below. Of course, there are other corner cases like unshare(2)
>> that still needs to be handled. Do you think something like this is viable?
> Deadlocks aside, the immediate problem here is that consensus number is too
> low. Take three threads sharing the same fs_struct instance. The first one
> calls your get_fs_pwd_share(); then the remaining two threads call set_fs_pwd()
> (e.g. by calling chdir(2) in userland code). The reference stored into
> fs->pwd_waiter by the first of those two gets overwritten by that stored
> by the second. When the caller of get_fs_pwd_share() gets to put_fs_pwd_share(),
> only one of the sleepers gets woken up...
>
> And it's very easy to end up with something as simple as chdir("foo") deadlocking -
> we start with resolving the relative pathname we'd been given, audit wants to
> record the current directory, on the theory that relative pathname is none too
> useful in logs without knowing what had it been relative to. Then, in the
> same thread, you call set_fs_pwd() - after all, that's the main effect of chdir(2).
> Deadlock...
>
> IOW, it's not just unshare(2) that needs to be taken care of - chdir(2) would need
> to be treated differently.
Now I realize that there is indeed a deadlock problem. Scrap that. Now I
have a simpler idea that shouldn't have this type of deadlock problem.
So what do you think about the sample code below?
Thanks,
Longman
=======================[ Cut here ]================================
diff --git a/fs/fs_struct.c b/fs/fs_struct.c
index b8c46c5a38a0..daeeb80cf088 100644
--- a/fs/fs_struct.c
+++ b/fs/fs_struct.c
@@ -32,15 +32,19 @@ void set_fs_root(struct fs_struct *fs, const struct
path *p>
void set_fs_pwd(struct fs_struct *fs, const struct path *path)
{
struct path old_pwd;
+ int xrefs;
path_get(path);
write_seqlock(&fs->seq);
old_pwd = fs->pwd;
fs->pwd = *path;
+ xrefs = fs->pwd_xrefs + 1;
+ fs->pwd_xrefs = 0;
write_sequnlock(&fs->seq);
if (old_pwd.dentry)
- path_put(&old_pwd);
+ while (xrefs--)
+ path_put(&old_pwd);
}
static inline int replace_path(struct path *p, const struct path *old,
const s>
diff --git a/include/linux/fs_struct.h b/include/linux/fs_struct.h
index 0070764b790a..0d79d51de240 100644
--- a/include/linux/fs_struct.h
+++ b/include/linux/fs_struct.h
@@ -8,10 +8,11 @@
#include <linux/seqlock.h>
struct fs_struct {
- int users;
seqlock_t seq;
+ int users;
int umask;
int in_exec;
+ int pwd_xrefs; /* Extra references of pwd */
struct path root, pwd;
} __randomize_layout;
@@ -40,6 +41,31 @@ static inline void get_fs_pwd(struct fs_struct *fs,
struct p>
read_sequnlock_excl(&fs->seq);
}
+static inline void get_fs_pwd_share(struct fs_struct *fs, struct path *pwd)
+{
+ read_seqlock_excl(&fs->seq);
+ *pwd = fs->pwd;
+ if (fs->pwd_xrefs)
+ fs->pwd_xrefs--;
+ else
+ path_get(pwd);
+ read_sequnlock_excl(&fs->seq);
+}
+
+static inline void put_fs_pwd_share(struct fs_struct *fs, struct path *pwd)
+{
+ bool put = false;
+
+ read_seqlock_excl(&fs->seq);
+ if ((fs->pwd.dentry == pwd->dentry) && (fs->pwd.mnt == pwd->mnt))
+ fs->pwd_xrefs++;
+ else
+ put = true;
+ read_sequnlock_excl(&fs->seq);
+ if (put)
+ path_put(pwd);
+}
+
extern bool current_chrooted(void);
static inline int current_umask(void)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-02-05 3:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-02-03 19:44 Waiman Long
2026-02-03 19:59 ` Al Viro
2026-02-03 20:18 ` Waiman Long
2026-02-03 20:05 ` Al Viro
2026-02-03 20:32 ` Waiman Long
2026-02-03 21:50 ` Al Viro
2026-02-03 23:26 ` Al Viro
2026-02-04 4:21 ` Waiman Long
2026-02-04 6:26 ` Al Viro
2026-02-04 18:16 ` Waiman Long
2026-02-04 20:18 ` Al Viro
2026-02-05 3:03 ` Waiman Long [this message]
2026-02-05 4:45 ` Waiman Long
2026-02-05 23:53 ` Al Viro
2026-02-06 1:20 ` Waiman Long
2026-02-06 4:11 ` Waiman Long
2026-02-06 4:19 ` Waiman Long
2026-02-06 5:22 ` Al Viro
2026-02-06 6:31 ` Al Viro
2026-02-06 6:38 ` Al Viro
2026-02-06 7:13 ` Al Viro
2026-02-06 19:16 ` Waiman Long
2026-02-06 20:04 ` Waiman Long
2026-02-06 20:38 ` Al Viro
2026-02-07 8:25 ` [PATCH][RFC] bug in unshare(2) failure recovery Al Viro
2026-02-07 23:06 ` Waiman Long
2026-02-17 12:49 ` Christian Brauner
2026-02-17 12:49 ` Christian Brauner
2026-02-06 20:29 ` [PATCH v2] audit: Avoid excessive dput/dget in audit_context setup and reset paths Al Viro
2026-02-06 20:58 ` setns(2) vs. pivot_root(2) (was Re: [PATCH v2] audit: Avoid excessive dput/dget in audit_context setup and reset paths) Al Viro
2026-02-06 21:09 ` Al Viro
2026-02-17 13:12 ` Christian Brauner
2026-02-06 8:15 ` [PATCH v2] audit: Avoid excessive dput/dget in audit_context setup and reset paths Al Viro
2026-02-05 5:22 ` Al Viro
2026-02-05 13:59 ` Waiman Long
2026-02-05 17:53 ` Mateusz Guzik
2026-02-17 13:33 ` Christian Brauner
2026-02-17 13:44 ` Mateusz Guzik
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=cbaab46e-715d-4d06-80af-320caec7feb7@redhat.com \
--to=llong@redhat.com \
--cc=audit@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=eparis@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paul@paul-moore.com \
--cc=rgb@redhat.com \
--cc=rrobaina@redhat.com \
--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®