Re: [Pvfs2-developers] kernel module copy attrs race

[Sam Lang]

-sam

Attached patch adds the lock around the getattr for revalidate. It also includes some cleanup to the d_revalidate function for my sanity.

fix-attr-race.patch
Description: Binary data

On Mar 25, 2008, at 12:19 PM, Pete Wyckoff wrote:

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on Tue, 25 Mar 2008 12:10 -0500:

I've been debugging a problem with simul returning EACCES errors on open of a PVFS file. It turns out the bug was due to permissions being (re-)set on

an inode without a mutex locking the write.  This was causing the

was wrong.

For each (subsequent) open, the kernel calls d_revalidate.  The PVFS

the inode and looked-up handle match, then it does a getattr on that

occurred, during copying of the attrs.  In pvfs2-utils.c:231, we set:

inode->i_mode = 0;



if (attrs->perms & PVFS_O_EXECUTE)
           perm_mode |= S_IXOTH;
if (attrs->perms & PVFS_O_WRITE)
           perm_mode |= S_IWOTH;
....

inode->i_mode |= perm_mode;


then perm_mode, the i_mode can be accessed by other processes (in the
kernel vfs permissions checking code, for example).


the pvfs attrs into the perm_mode field all while i_mode is 0.  Just

test case, even though there's still a RMW race there.


that?

permissions checks in other opens of the same file to fail because the mode implementation of d_revalidate does a lookup to verify that the handle of handle, and copies the attributes into the inode. This is where the race /* figure out the correct permissions for the file based on pvfs attrs */ That entire block is unprotected, so between setting the i_mode to 0 and I think the problem is exacerbated by the large block of code that converts setting inode->i_mode = perm_mode directly made the bug disappear for my I'm tempted to throw a big mutex_lock(inode->i_mutex) around the entire code block that does copy_attrs_to_inode. Any objections against doing

Definitely wants locking, but I think it should be in the caller.
One of the two callers in that file already has the new inode,
locked, so it doesn't want another level of locking.  Ditto for the
caller in dir.c.  If it is true that that inode locking is
sufficient to keep other processes away.

                -- Pete

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

_______________________________________________
Pvfs2-developers mailing list
Pvfs2-developers@beowulf-underground.org
http://www.beowulf-underground.org/mailman/listinfo/pvfs2-developers