Skip to content

cloud-kernel
cloud-kernel

openanolis / cloud-kernel
1 年多 前同步成功

通知 161
Star 36
Fork 7
cloud-kernel
cloud-kernel
切换分支/标签
  1. 02 9月, 2020 24 次提交
  3. 17 1月, 2020 1 次提交
  5. 15 1月, 2020 1 次提交
  7. 13 12月, 2019 2 次提交
  9. 21 11月, 2019 1 次提交
  11. 06 11月, 2019 2 次提交
  13. 12 10月, 2019 1 次提交
  15. 05 10月, 2019 2 次提交
    • E
      fuse: fix deadlock with aio poll and fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock · 5bead06b
      由 Eric Biggers 提交于 
      [ Upstream commit 76e43c8ccaa35c30d5df853013561145a0f750a5 ]

When IOCB_CMD_POLL is used on the FUSE device, aio_poll() disables IRQs
and takes kioctx::ctx_lock, then fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock.

This may have to wait for fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock to be released by one
of many places that take it with IRQs enabled.  Since the IRQ handler
may take kioctx::ctx_lock, lockdep reports that a deadlock is possible.

Fix it by protecting the state of struct fuse_iqueue with a separate
spinlock, and only accessing fuse_iqueue::waitq using the versions of
the waitqueue functions which do IRQ-safe locking internally.

Reproducer:

	#include <fcntl.h>
	#include <stdio.h>
	#include <sys/mount.h>
	#include <sys/stat.h>
	#include <sys/syscall.h>
	#include <unistd.h>
	#include <linux/aio_abi.h>

	int main()
	{
		char opts[128];
		int fd = open("/dev/fuse", O_RDWR);
		aio_context_t ctx = 0;
		struct iocb cb = { .aio_lio_opcode = IOCB_CMD_POLL, .aio_fildes = fd };
		struct iocb *cbp = &cb;

		sprintf(opts, "fd=%d,rootmode=040000,user_id=0,group_id=0", fd);
		mkdir("mnt", 0700);
		mount("foo",  "mnt", "fuse", 0, opts);
		syscall(__NR_io_setup, 1, &ctx);
		syscall(__NR_io_submit, ctx, 1, &cbp);
	}

Beginning of lockdep output:

	=====================================================
	WARNING: SOFTIRQ-safe -> SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order detected
	5.3.0-rc5 #9 Not tainted
	-----------------------------------------------------
	syz_fuse/135 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE0:SE1] is trying to acquire:
	000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: spin_lock include/linux/spinlock.h:338 [inline]
	000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1751 [inline]
	000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x203/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825

	and this task is already holding:
	0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: spin_lock_irq include/linux/spinlock.h:363 [inline]
	0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1749 [inline]
	0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x1f4/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825
	which would create a new lock dependency:
	 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} -> (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}

	but this new dependency connects a SOFTIRQ-irq-safe lock:
	 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}

	[...]

Reported-by: syzbot+af05535bb79520f95431@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Reported-by: syzbot+d86c4426a01f60feddc7@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Fixes: bfe4037e ("aio: implement IOCB_CMD_POLL")
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v4.19+
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Signed-off-by: NEric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
Signed-off-by: NMiklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: NSasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: NGreg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
      5bead06b
    • V
      fuse: fix missing unlock_page in fuse_writepage() · ad411629
      由 Vasily Averin 提交于 
      commit d5880c7a8620290a6c90ced7a0e8bd0ad9419601 upstream.

unlock_page() was missing in case of an already in-flight write against the
same page.
Signed-off-by: NVasily Averin <vvs@virtuozzo.com>
Fixes: ff17be08 ("fuse: writepage: skip already in flight")
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v3.13
Signed-off-by: NMiklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: NGreg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
      ad411629
  17. 15 6月, 2019 1 次提交
    • K
      fuse: retrieve: cap requested size to negotiated max_write · ae35c325
      由 Kirill Smelkov 提交于 
      [ Upstream commit 7640682e67b33cab8628729afec8ca92b851394f ]

FUSE filesystem server and kernel client negotiate during initialization
phase, what should be the maximum write size the client will ever issue.
Correspondingly the filesystem server then queues sys_read calls to read
requests with buffer capacity large enough to carry request header + that
max_write bytes. A filesystem server is free to set its max_write in
anywhere in the range between [1*page, fc->max_pages*page]. In particular
go-fuse[2] sets max_write by default as 64K, wheres default fc->max_pages
corresponds to 128K. Libfuse also allows users to configure max_write, but
by default presets it to possible maximum.

If max_write is < fc->max_pages*page, and in NOTIFY_RETRIEVE handler we
allow to retrieve more than max_write bytes, corresponding prepared
NOTIFY_REPLY will be thrown away by fuse_dev_do_read, because the
filesystem server, in full correspondence with server/client contract, will
be only queuing sys_read with ~max_write buffer capacity, and
fuse_dev_do_read throws away requests that cannot fit into server request
buffer. In turn the filesystem server could get stuck waiting indefinitely
for NOTIFY_REPLY since NOTIFY_RETRIEVE handler returned OK which is
understood by clients as that NOTIFY_REPLY was queued and will be sent
back.

Cap requested size to negotiate max_write to avoid the problem.  This
aligns with the way NOTIFY_RETRIEVE handler works, which already
unconditionally caps requested retrieve size to fuse_conn->max_pages.  This
way it should not hurt NOTIFY_RETRIEVE semantic if we return less data than
was originally requested.

Please see [1] for context where the problem of stuck filesystem was hit
for real, how the situation was traced and for more involving patch that
did not make it into the tree.

[1] https://marc.info/?l=linux-fsdevel&m=155057023600853&w=2
[2] https://github.com/hanwen/go-fuseSigned-off-by: NKirill Smelkov <kirr@nexedi.com>
Cc: Han-Wen Nienhuys <hanwen@google.com>
Cc: Jakob Unterwurzacher <jakobunt@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: NMiklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: NSasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
      ae35c325
  19. 11 6月, 2019 1 次提交
  21. 26 5月, 2019 3 次提交
  23. 04 5月, 2019 1 次提交