Skip to content

R
raspberrypi-kernel

openeuler / raspberrypi-kernel

通知 13
Star 1
Fork 0
R
raspberrypi-kernel
切换分支/标签
  1. 25 12月, 2016 1 次提交
  3. 05 12月, 2016 1 次提交
  5. 09 1月, 2016 1 次提交
  7. 09 1月, 2015 1 次提交
  9. 10 9月, 2014 1 次提交
  11. 09 8月, 2014 1 次提交
    • D
      shm: add sealing API · 40e041a2
      由 David Herrmann 提交于 
      If two processes share a common memory region, they usually want some
guarantees to allow safe access. This often includes:
  - one side cannot overwrite data while the other reads it
  - one side cannot shrink the buffer while the other accesses it
  - one side cannot grow the buffer beyond previously set boundaries

If there is a trust-relationship between both parties, there is no need
for policy enforcement.  However, if there's no trust relationship (eg.,
for general-purpose IPC) sharing memory-regions is highly fragile and
often not possible without local copies.  Look at the following two
use-cases:

  1) A graphics client wants to share its rendering-buffer with a
     graphics-server. The memory-region is allocated by the client for
     read/write access and a second FD is passed to the server. While
     scanning out from the memory region, the server has no guarantee that
     the client doesn't shrink the buffer at any time, requiring rather
     cumbersome SIGBUS handling.
  2) A process wants to perform an RPC on another process. To avoid huge
     bandwidth consumption, zero-copy is preferred. After a message is
     assembled in-memory and a FD is passed to the remote side, both sides
     want to be sure that neither modifies this shared copy, anymore. The
     source may have put sensible data into the message without a separate
     copy and the target may want to parse the message inline, to avoid a
     local copy.

While SIGBUS handling, POSIX mandatory locking and MAP_DENYWRITE provide
ways to achieve most of this, the first one is unproportionally ugly to
use in libraries and the latter two are broken/racy or even disabled due
to denial of service attacks.

This patch introduces the concept of SEALING.  If you seal a file, a
specific set of operations is blocked on that file forever.  Unlike locks,
seals can only be set, never removed.  Hence, once you verified a specific
set of seals is set, you're guaranteed that no-one can perform the blocked
operations on this file, anymore.

An initial set of SEALS is introduced by this patch:
  - SHRINK: If SEAL_SHRINK is set, the file in question cannot be reduced
            in size. This affects ftruncate() and open(O_TRUNC).
  - GROW: If SEAL_GROW is set, the file in question cannot be increased
          in size. This affects ftruncate(), fallocate() and write().
  - WRITE: If SEAL_WRITE is set, no write operations (besides resizing)
           are possible. This affects fallocate(PUNCH_HOLE), mmap() and
           write().
  - SEAL: If SEAL_SEAL is set, no further seals can be added to a file.
          This basically prevents the F_ADD_SEAL operation on a file and
          can be set to prevent others from adding further seals that you
          don't want.

The described use-cases can easily use these seals to provide safe use
without any trust-relationship:

  1) The graphics server can verify that a passed file-descriptor has
     SEAL_SHRINK set. This allows safe scanout, while the client is
     allowed to increase buffer size for window-resizing on-the-fly.
     Concurrent writes are explicitly allowed.
  2) For general-purpose IPC, both processes can verify that SEAL_SHRINK,
     SEAL_GROW and SEAL_WRITE are set. This guarantees that neither
     process can modify the data while the other side parses it.
     Furthermore, it guarantees that even with writable FDs passed to the
     peer, it cannot increase the size to hit memory-limits of the source
     process (in case the file-storage is accounted to the source).

The new API is an extension to fcntl(), adding two new commands:
  F_GET_SEALS: Return a bitset describing the seals on the file. This
               can be called on any FD if the underlying file supports
               sealing.
  F_ADD_SEALS: Change the seals of a given file. This requires WRITE
               access to the file and F_SEAL_SEAL may not already be set.
               Furthermore, the underlying file must support sealing and
               there may not be any existing shared mapping of that file.
               Otherwise, EBADF/EPERM is returned.
               The given seals are _added_ to the existing set of seals
               on the file. You cannot remove seals again.

The fcntl() handler is currently specific to shmem and disabled on all
files. A file needs to explicitly support sealing for this interface to
work. A separate syscall is added in a follow-up, which creates files that
support sealing. There is no intention to support this on other
file-systems. Semantics are unclear for non-volatile files and we lack any
use-case right now. Therefore, the implementation is specific to shmem.
Signed-off-by: NDavid Herrmann <dh.herrmann@gmail.com>
Acked-by: NHugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Cc: Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>
Cc: Ryan Lortie <desrt@desrt.ca>
Cc: Lennart Poettering <lennart@poettering.net>
Cc: Daniel Mack <zonque@gmail.com>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Signed-off-by: NAndrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
      40e041a2
  13. 22 4月, 2014 1 次提交
    • J
      locks: rename file-private locks to "open file description locks" · 0d3f7a2d
      由 Jeff Layton 提交于 
      File-private locks have been merged into Linux for v3.15, and *now*
people are commenting that the name and macro definitions for the new
file-private locks suck.

...and I can't even disagree. The names and command macros do suck.

We're going to have to live with these for a long time, so it's
important that we be happy with the names before we're stuck with them.
The consensus on the lists so far is that they should be rechristened as
"open file description locks".

The name isn't a big deal for the kernel, but the command macros are not
visually distinct enough from the traditional POSIX lock macros. The
glibc and documentation folks are recommending that we change them to
look like F_OFD_{GETLK|SETLK|SETLKW}. That lessens the chance that a
programmer will typo one of the commands wrong, and also makes it easier
to spot this difference when reading code.

This patch makes the following changes that I think are necessary before
v3.15 ships:

1) rename the command macros to their new names. These end up in the uapi
   headers and so are part of the external-facing API. It turns out that
   glibc doesn't actually use the fcntl.h uapi header, but it's hard to
   be sure that something else won't. Changing it now is safest.

2) make the the /proc/locks output display these as type "OFDLCK"

Cc: Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: Carlos O'Donell <carlos@redhat.com>
Cc: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Cc: Frank Filz <ffilzlnx@mindspring.com>
Cc: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Signed-off-by: NJeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
      0d3f7a2d
  15. 31 3月, 2014 2 次提交
    • J
      locks: add new fcntl cmd values for handling file private locks · 5d50ffd7
      由 Jeff Layton 提交于 
      Due to some unfortunate history, POSIX locks have very strange and
unhelpful semantics. The thing that usually catches people by surprise
is that they are dropped whenever the process closes any file descriptor
associated with the inode.

This is extremely problematic for people developing file servers that
need to implement byte-range locks. Developers often need a "lock
management" facility to ensure that file descriptors are not closed
until all of the locks associated with the inode are finished.

Additionally, "classic" POSIX locks are owned by the process. Locks
taken between threads within the same process won't conflict with one
another, which renders them useless for synchronization between threads.

This patchset adds a new type of lock that attempts to address these
issues. These locks conflict with classic POSIX read/write locks, but
have semantics that are more like BSD locks with respect to inheritance
and behavior on close.

This is implemented primarily by changing how fl_owner field is set for
these locks. Instead of having them owned by the files_struct of the
process, they are instead owned by the filp on which they were acquired.
Thus, they are inherited across fork() and are only released when the
last reference to a filp is put.

These new semantics prevent them from being merged with classic POSIX
locks, even if they are acquired by the same process. These locks will
also conflict with classic POSIX locks even if they are acquired by
the same process or on the same file descriptor.

The new locks are managed using a new set of cmd values to the fcntl()
syscall. The initial implementation of this converts these values to
"classic" cmd values at a fairly high level, and the details are not
exposed to the underlying filesystem. We may eventually want to push
this handing out to the lower filesystem code but for now I don't
see any need for it.

Also, note that with this implementation the new cmd values are only
available via fcntl64() on 32-bit arches. There's little need to
add support for legacy apps on a new interface like this.
Signed-off-by: NJeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
      5d50ffd7
    • J
      locks: pass the cmd value to fcntl_getlk/getlk64 · c1e62b8f
      由 Jeff Layton 提交于 
      Once we introduce file private locks, we'll need to know what cmd value
was used, as that affects the ownership and whether a conflict would
arise.
Signed-off-by: NJeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
      c1e62b8f
  17. 25 10月, 2013 1 次提交
  19. 05 8月, 2013 1 次提交
  21. 23 2月, 2013 1 次提交
  23. 09 10月, 2012 1 次提交
  25. 27 9月, 2012 4 次提交
  27. 31 7月, 2012 1 次提交
  29. 30 5月, 2012 1 次提交
  31. 03 5月, 2012 1 次提交
  33. 20 2月, 2012 1 次提交
    • D
      Wrap accesses to the fd_sets in struct fdtable · 1dce27c5
      由 David Howells 提交于 
      Wrap accesses to the fd_sets in struct fdtable (for recording open files and
close-on-exec flags) so that we can move away from using fd_sets since we
abuse the fd_set structs by not allocating the full-sized structure under
normal circumstances and by non-core code looking at the internals of the
fd_sets.

The first abuse means that use of FD_ZERO() on these fd_sets is not permitted,
since that cannot be told about their abnormal lengths.

This introduces six wrapper functions for setting, clearing and testing
close-on-exec flags and fd-is-open flags:

	void __set_close_on_exec(int fd, struct fdtable *fdt);
	void __clear_close_on_exec(int fd, struct fdtable *fdt);
	bool close_on_exec(int fd, const struct fdtable *fdt);
	void __set_open_fd(int fd, struct fdtable *fdt);
	void __clear_open_fd(int fd, struct fdtable *fdt);
	bool fd_is_open(int fd, const struct fdtable *fdt);

Note that I've prepended '__' to the names of the set/clear functions because
they require the caller to hold a lock to use them.

Note also that I haven't added wrappers for looking behind the scenes at the
the array.  Possibly that should exist too.
Signed-off-by: NDavid Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20120216174942.23314.1364.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.ukSigned-off-by: NH. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
      1dce27c5
  35. 24 3月, 2011 1 次提交
  37. 15 3月, 2011 1 次提交
    • A
      New kind of open files - "location only". · 1abf0c71
      由 Al Viro 提交于 
      New flag for open(2) - O_PATH.  Semantics:
	* pathname is resolved, but the file itself is _NOT_ opened
as far as filesystem is concerned.
	* almost all operations on the resulting descriptors shall
fail with -EBADF.  Exceptions are:
	1) operations on descriptors themselves (i.e.
		close(), dup(), dup2(), dup3(), fcntl(fd, F_DUPFD),
		fcntl(fd, F_DUPFD_CLOEXEC, ...), fcntl(fd, F_GETFD),
		fcntl(fd, F_SETFD, ...))
	2) fcntl(fd, F_GETFL), for a common non-destructive way to
		check if descriptor is open
	3) "dfd" arguments of ...at(2) syscalls, i.e. the starting
		points of pathname resolution
	* closing such descriptor does *NOT* affect dnotify or
posix locks.
	* permissions are checked as usual along the way to file;
no permission checks are applied to the file itself.  Of course,
giving such thing to syscall will result in permission checks (at
the moment it means checking that starting point of ....at() is
a directory and caller has exec permissions on it).

fget() and fget_light() return NULL on such descriptors; use of
fget_raw() and fget_raw_light() is needed to get them.  That protects
existing code from dealing with those things.

There are two things still missing (they come in the next commits):
one is handling of symlinks (right now we refuse to open them that
way; see the next commit for semantics related to those) and another
is descriptor passing via SCM_RIGHTS datagrams.
Signed-off-by: NAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
      1abf0c71
  39. 03 2月, 2011 1 次提交
  41. 28 10月, 2010 2 次提交
    • L
      fasync: Fix placement of FASYNC flag comment · 55f335a8
      由 Linus Torvalds 提交于 
      In commit f7347ce4 ("fasync: re-organize fasync entry insertion to
allow it under a spinlock") Arnd took an earlier patch of mine that had
the comment about the FASYNC flag above the wrong function.

When the fasync_add_entry() function was split to introduce the new
fasync_insert_entry() helper function, the code that actually cares
about the FASYNC bit moved to that new helper.

So just move the comment to the right point.
Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
      55f335a8
    • L
      fasync: re-organize fasync entry insertion to allow it under a spinlock · f7347ce4
      由 Linus Torvalds 提交于 
      You currently cannot use "fasync_helper()" in an atomic environment to
insert a new fasync entry, because it will need to allocate the new
"struct fasync_struct".

Yet fcntl_setlease() wants to call this under lock_flocks(), which is in
the process of being converted from the BKL to a spinlock.

In order to fix this, this abstracts out the actual fasync list
insertion and the fasync allocations into functions of their own, and
teaches fs/locks.c to pre-allocate the fasync_struct entry.  That way
the actual list insertion can happen while holding the required
spinlock.
Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
[bfields@redhat.com: rebase on top of my changes to Arnd's patch]
Tested-by: NJ. Bruce Fields <bfields@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: NArnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
      f7347ce4
  43. 10 9月, 2010 1 次提交
  45. 11 8月, 2010 1 次提交
  47. 30 6月, 2010 1 次提交
  49. 05 6月, 2010 1 次提交
  51. 22 5月, 2010 1 次提交
  53. 22 4月, 2010 1 次提交
    • E
      fasync: RCU and fine grained locking · 989a2979
      由 Eric Dumazet 提交于 
      kill_fasync() uses a central rwlock, candidate for RCU conversion, to
avoid cache line ping pongs on SMP.

fasync_remove_entry() and fasync_add_entry() can disable IRQS on a short
section instead during whole list scan.

Use a spinlock per fasync_struct to synchronize kill_fasync_rcu() and
fasync_{remove|add}_entry(). This spinlock is IRQ safe, so sock_fasync()
doesnt need its own implementation and can use fasync_helper(), to
reduce code size and complexity.

We can remove __kill_fasync() direct use in net/socket.c, and rename it
to kill_fasync_rcu().
Signed-off-by: NEric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: NDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
      989a2979
  55. 07 3月, 2010 1 次提交
  57. 08 2月, 2010 1 次提交
    • L
      Fix race in tty_fasync() properly · 80e1e823
      由 Linus Torvalds 提交于 
      This reverts commit 70362511 ("tty: fix race in tty_fasync") and
commit b04da8bf ("fnctl: f_modown should call write_lock_irqsave/
restore") that tried to fix up some of the fallout but was incomplete.

It turns out that we really cannot hold 'tty->ctrl_lock' over calling
__f_setown, because not only did that cause problems with interrupt
disables (which the second commit fixed), it also causes a potential
ABBA deadlock due to lock ordering.

Thanks to Tetsuo Handa for following up on the issue, and running
lockdep to show the problem.  It goes roughly like this:

 - f_getown gets filp->f_owner.lock for reading without interrupts
   disabled, so an interrupt that happens while that lock is held can
   cause a lockdep chain from f_owner.lock -> sighand->siglock.

 - at the same time, the tty->ctrl_lock -> f_owner.lock chain that
   commit 70362511 introduced, together with the pre-existing
   sighand->siglock -> tty->ctrl_lock chain means that we have a lock
   dependency the other way too.

So instead of extending tty->ctrl_lock over the whole __f_setown() call,
we now just take a reference to the 'pid' structure while holding the
lock, and then release it after having done the __f_setown.  That still
guarantees that 'struct pid' won't go away from under us, which is all
we really ever needed.
Reported-and-tested-by: NTetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Acked-by: NGreg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
Acked-by: NAmérico Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>
Cc: stable@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
      80e1e823
  59. 27 1月, 2010 1 次提交
  61. 17 12月, 2009 1 次提交
    • L
      fasync: split 'fasync_helper()' into separate add/remove functions · 53281b6d
      由 Linus Torvalds 提交于 
      Yes, the add and remove cases do share the same basic loop and the
locking, but the compiler can inline and then CSE some of the end result
anyway.  And splitting it up makes the code way easier to follow,
and makes it clearer exactly what the semantics are.

In particular, we must make sure that the FASYNC flag in file->f_flags
exactly matches the state of "is this file on any fasync list", since
not only is that flag visible to user space (F_GETFL), but we also use
that flag to check whether we need to remove any fasync entries on file
close.

We got that wrong for the case of a mixed use of file locking (which
tries to remove any fasync entries for file leases) and fasync.

Splitting the function up also makes it possible to do some future
optimizations without making the function even messier.  In particular,
since the FASYNC flag has to match the state of "is this on a list", we
can do the following future optimizations:

 - on remove, we don't even need to get the locks and traverse the list
   if FASYNC isn't set, since we can know a priori that there is no
   point (this is effectively the same optimization that we already do
   in __fput() wrt removing fasync on file close)

 - on add, we can use the FASYNC flag to decide whether we are changing
   an existing entry or need to allocate a new one.

but this is just the cleanup + fix for the FASYNC flag.
Acked-by: NAl Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Tested-by: NTavis Ormandy <taviso@google.com>
Cc: Jeff Dike <jdike@addtoit.com>
Cc: Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com>
Cc: stable@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
      53281b6d
  63. 18 11月, 2009 1 次提交
  65. 24 9月, 2009 2 次提交
    • P
      fcntl: add F_[SG]ETOWN_EX · ba0a6c9f
      由 Peter Zijlstra 提交于 
      In order to direct the SIGIO signal to a particular thread of a
multi-threaded application we cannot, like suggested by the manpage, put a
TID into the regular fcntl(F_SETOWN) call.  It will still be send to the
whole process of which that thread is part.

Since people do want to properly direct SIGIO we introduce F_SETOWN_EX.

The need to direct SIGIO comes from self-monitoring profiling such as with
perf-counters.  Perf-counters uses SIGIO to notify that new sample data is
available.  If the signal is delivered to the same task that generated the
new sample it can augment that data by inspecting the task's user-space
state right after it returns from the kernel.  This is esp.  convenient
for interpreted or virtual machine driven environments.

Both F_SETOWN_EX and F_GETOWN_EX take a pointer to a struct f_owner_ex
as argument:

struct f_owner_ex {
	int   type;
	pid_t pid;
};

Where type is one of F_OWNER_TID, F_OWNER_PID or F_OWNER_GID.
Signed-off-by: NPeter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Reviewed-by: NOleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Tested-by: Nstephane eranian <eranian@googlemail.com>
Cc: Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@googlemail.com>
Cc: Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Signed-off-by: NAndrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
      ba0a6c9f
    • O
      signals: send_sigio: use do_send_sig_info() to avoid check_kill_permission() · 06f1631a
      由 Oleg Nesterov 提交于 
      group_send_sig_info()->check_kill_permission() assumes that current is the
sender and uses current_cred().

This is not true in send_sigio_to_task() case.  From the security pov the
sender is not current, but the task which did fcntl(F_SETOWN), that is why
we have sigio_perm() which uses the right creds to check.

Fortunately, send_sigio() always sends either SEND_SIG_PRIV or
SI_FROMKERNEL() signal, so check_kill_permission() does nothing.  But
still it would be tidier to avoid this bogus security check and save a
couple of cycles.
Signed-off-by: NOleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: stephane eranian <eranian@googlemail.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: NAndrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
      06f1631a
  67. 13 7月, 2009 1 次提交