Home Home > GIT Browse
summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorEric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>2017-02-20 18:17:03 +1300
committerEric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>2017-02-22 08:34:53 +1300
commitace0c791e6c3cf5ef37cad2df69f0d90ccc40ffb (patch)
tree949d07fc86ef5bafcdcd4b2dc1a8f7ad6af02e01
parentfea6d2a610c899bb7fd8e95fcbf46900b886e5a3 (diff)
proc/sysctl: Don't grab i_lock under sysctl_lock.
Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@yandex-team.ru> writes: > This patch has locking problem. I've got lockdep splat under LTP. > > [ 6633.115456] ====================================================== > [ 6633.115502] [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ] > [ 6633.115553] 4.9.10-debug+ #9 Tainted: G L > [ 6633.115584] ------------------------------------------------------- > [ 6633.115627] ksm02/284980 is trying to acquire lock: > [ 6633.115659] (&sb->s_type->i_lock_key#4){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffff816bc1ce>] igrab+0x1e/0x80 > [ 6633.115834] but task is already holding lock: > [ 6633.115882] (sysctl_lock){+.+...}, at: [<ffffffff817e379b>] unregister_sysctl_table+0x6b/0x110 > [ 6633.116026] which lock already depends on the new lock. > [ 6633.116026] > [ 6633.116080] > [ 6633.116080] the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is: > [ 6633.116117] > -> #2 (sysctl_lock){+.+...}: > -> #1 (&(&dentry->d_lockref.lock)->rlock){+.+...}: > -> #0 (&sb->s_type->i_lock_key#4){+.+...}: > > d_lock nests inside i_lock > sysctl_lock nests inside d_lock in d_compare > > This patch adds i_lock nesting inside sysctl_lock. Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> replied: > Once ->unregistering is set, you can drop sysctl_lock just fine. So I'd > try something like this - use rcu_read_lock() in proc_sys_prune_dcache(), > drop sysctl_lock() before it and regain after. Make sure that no inodes > are added to the list ones ->unregistering has been set and use RCU list > primitives for modifying the inode list, with sysctl_lock still used to > serialize its modifications. > > Freeing struct inode is RCU-delayed (see proc_destroy_inode()), so doing > igrab() is safe there. Since we don't drop inode reference until after we'd > passed beyond it in the list, list_for_each_entry_rcu() should be fine. I agree with Al Viro's analsysis of the situtation. Fixes: d6cffbbe9a7e ("proc/sysctl: prune stale dentries during unregistering") Reported-by: Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@yandex-team.ru> Tested-by: Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@yandex-team.ru> Suggested-by: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> Signed-off-by: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
-rw-r--r--fs/proc/proc_sysctl.c31
1 files changed, 18 insertions, 13 deletions
diff --git a/fs/proc/proc_sysctl.c b/fs/proc/proc_sysctl.c
index 8efb1e10b025..3e64c6502dc8 100644
--- a/fs/proc/proc_sysctl.c
+++ b/fs/proc/proc_sysctl.c
@@ -266,21 +266,19 @@ static void proc_sys_prune_dcache(struct ctl_table_header *head)
struct inode *inode, *prev = NULL;
struct proc_inode *ei;
- list_for_each_entry(ei, &head->inodes, sysctl_inodes) {
+ rcu_read_lock();
+ list_for_each_entry_rcu(ei, &head->inodes, sysctl_inodes) {
inode = igrab(&ei->vfs_inode);
if (inode) {
- spin_unlock(&sysctl_lock);
+ rcu_read_unlock();
iput(prev);
prev = inode;
d_prune_aliases(inode);
- spin_lock(&sysctl_lock);
+ rcu_read_lock();
}
}
- if (prev) {
- spin_unlock(&sysctl_lock);
- iput(prev);
- spin_lock(&sysctl_lock);
- }
+ rcu_read_unlock();
+ iput(prev);
}
/* called under sysctl_lock, will reacquire if has to wait */
@@ -296,10 +294,10 @@ static void start_unregistering(struct ctl_table_header *p)
p->unregistering = &wait;
spin_unlock(&sysctl_lock);
wait_for_completion(&wait);
- spin_lock(&sysctl_lock);
} else {
/* anything non-NULL; we'll never dereference it */
p->unregistering = ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
+ spin_unlock(&sysctl_lock);
}
/*
* Prune dentries for unregistered sysctls: namespaced sysctls
@@ -310,6 +308,7 @@ static void start_unregistering(struct ctl_table_header *p)
* do not remove from the list until nobody holds it; walking the
* list in do_sysctl() relies on that.
*/
+ spin_lock(&sysctl_lock);
erase_header(p);
}
@@ -455,11 +454,17 @@ static struct inode *proc_sys_make_inode(struct super_block *sb,
inode->i_ino = get_next_ino();
ei = PROC_I(inode);
- ei->sysctl = head;
- ei->sysctl_entry = table;
spin_lock(&sysctl_lock);
- list_add(&ei->sysctl_inodes, &head->inodes);
+ if (unlikely(head->unregistering)) {
+ spin_unlock(&sysctl_lock);
+ iput(inode);
+ inode = NULL;
+ goto out;
+ }
+ ei->sysctl = head;
+ ei->sysctl_entry = table;
+ list_add_rcu(&ei->sysctl_inodes, &head->inodes);
head->count++;
spin_unlock(&sysctl_lock);
@@ -487,7 +492,7 @@ out:
void proc_sys_evict_inode(struct inode *inode, struct ctl_table_header *head)
{
spin_lock(&sysctl_lock);
- list_del(&PROC_I(inode)->sysctl_inodes);
+ list_del_rcu(&PROC_I(inode)->sysctl_inodes);
if (!--head->count)
kfree_rcu(head, rcu);
spin_unlock(&sysctl_lock);