Donate to e Foundation | Murena handsets with /e/OS | Own a part of Murena! Learn more

Commit ace0c791 authored by Eric W. Biederman's avatar Eric W. Biederman
Browse files

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: d6cffbbe ("proc/sysctl: prune stale dentries during unregistering")
Reported-by: default avatarKonstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@yandex-team.ru>
Tested-by: default avatarKonstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@yandex-team.ru>
Suggested-by: default avatarAl Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Signed-off-by: default avatar"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
parent fea6d2a6
Loading
Loading
Loading
Loading
+18 −13
Original line number Diff line number Diff line
@@ -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);
	rcu_read_unlock();
	iput(prev);
		spin_lock(&sysctl_lock);
	}
}

/* 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 @@ static struct inode *proc_sys_make_inode(struct super_block *sb,
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);