Re: [PATCH] fuse: fix conversion of fuse_reverse_inval_entry() to start_removing()

On Sun, Nov 30, 2025 at 11:06 PM NeilBrown <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> From: NeilBrown <[email protected]>
>
> The recent conversion of fuse_reverse_inval_entry() to use
> start_removing() was wrong.
> As Val Packett points out the original code did not call ->lookup
> while the new code does.  This can lead to a deadlock.
>
> Rather than using full_name_hash() and d_lookup() as the old code
> did, we can use try_lookup_noperm() which combines these.  Then
> the result can be given to start_removing_dentry() to get the required
> locks for removal.  We then double check that the name hasn't
> changed.
>
> As 'dir' needs to be used several times now, we load the dput() until
> the end, and initialise to NULL so dput() is always safe.
>
> Reported-by: Val Packett <[email protected]>
> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]
> Fixes: c9ba789dad15 ("VFS: introduce start_creating_noperm() and start_removing_noperm()")
> Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <[email protected]>
> ---
>  fs/fuse/dir.c | 23 ++++++++++++++++-------
>  1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/fuse/dir.c b/fs/fuse/dir.c
> index a0d5b302bcc2..8384fa96cf53 100644
> --- a/fs/fuse/dir.c
> +++ b/fs/fuse/dir.c
> @@ -1390,8 +1390,8 @@ int fuse_reverse_inval_entry(struct fuse_conn *fc, u64 parent_nodeid,
>  {
>         int err = -ENOTDIR;
>         struct inode *parent;
> -       struct dentry *dir;
> -       struct dentry *entry;
> +       struct dentry *dir = NULL;
> +       struct dentry *entry = NULL;
>
>         parent = fuse_ilookup(fc, parent_nodeid, NULL);
>         if (!parent)
> @@ -1404,11 +1404,19 @@ int fuse_reverse_inval_entry(struct fuse_conn *fc, u64 parent_nodeid,
>         dir = d_find_alias(parent);
>         if (!dir)
>                 goto put_parent;
> -
> -       entry = start_removing_noperm(dir, name);
> -       dput(dir);
> -       if (IS_ERR(entry))
> -               goto put_parent;
> +       while (!entry) {
> +               struct dentry *child = try_lookup_noperm(name, dir);
> +               if (!child || IS_ERR(child))
> +                       goto put_parent;
> +               entry = start_removing_dentry(dir, child);
> +               dput(child);
> +               if (IS_ERR(entry))
> +                       goto put_parent;
> +               if (!d_same_name(entry, dir, name)) {
> +                       end_removing(entry);
> +                       entry = NULL;
> +               }
> +       }

Can you explain why it is so important to use
start_removing_dentry() around shrink_dcache_parent()?

Is there a problem with reverting the change in this function
instead of accomodating start_removing_dentry()?

I don't think there is a point in optimizing parallel dir operations
with FUSE server cache invalidation, but maybe I am missing
something.

Thanks,
Amir.