Re: [PATCH 16/53] ovl: drop dir lock for lookups in impure readdir
Amir Goldstein <[email protected]> Sun, 15 Mar 2026 14:51:27 +0100
| Newsgroups | org.kernel.vger.ecryptfs,dev.linux.lists.gfs2,org.infradead.lists.linux-um,org.kernel.vger.ceph-devel,org.kernel.vger.linux-cifs,org.kernel.vger.linux-efi,org.kernel.vger.linux-ext4,org.kernel.vger.linux-fsdevel,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-nfs,org.kernel.vger.linux-trace-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-unionfs,org.kernel.vger.linux-xfs,org.kvack.linux-mm |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAOQ4uxjmcNxsCmDSVgkTns=3BAuQcT3pVvsQzza+u3iqXqrz5g@mail.gmail.com> |
On Thu, Mar 12, 2026 at 10:49=E2=80=AFPM NeilBrown <[email protected]> wrot= e: > > From: NeilBrown <[email protected]> > > When performing an "impure" readdir, ovl needs to perform a lookup on som= e > of the names that it found. > With proposed locking changes it will not be possible to perform this > lookup (in particular, not safe to wait for d_alloc_parallel()) while > holding a lock on the directory. > > ovl doesn't really need the lock at this point. Not exactly. see below. > It has already iterated > the directory and has cached a list of the contents. It now needs to > gather extra information about some contents. It can do this without > the lock. > > After gathering that info it needs to retake the lock for API > correctness. After doing this it must check IS_DEADDIR() again to > ensure readdir always returns -ENOENT on a removed directory. > > Note that while ->iterate_shared is called with a shared lock, ovl uses > WRAP_DIR_ITER() so an exclusive lock is held and so we drop and retake > that exclusive lock. > > As the directory is no longer locked in ovl_cache_update() we need > dget_parent() to get a reference to the parent. > > Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <[email protected]> > --- > fs/overlayfs/readdir.c | 19 ++++++++++++------- > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/overlayfs/readdir.c b/fs/overlayfs/readdir.c > index 1dcc75b3a90f..d5123b37921c 100644 > --- a/fs/overlayfs/readdir.c > +++ b/fs/overlayfs/readdir.c > @@ -568,13 +568,12 @@ static int ovl_cache_update(const struct path *path= , struct ovl_cache_entry *p, > goto get; > } > if (p->len =3D=3D 2) { > - /* we shall not be moved */ > - this =3D dget(dir->d_parent); > + this =3D dget_parent(dir); > goto get; > } > } > /* This checks also for xwhiteouts */ > - this =3D lookup_one(mnt_idmap(path->mnt), &QSTR_LEN(p->name, p->l= en), dir); > + this =3D lookup_one_unlocked(mnt_idmap(path->mnt), &QSTR_LEN(p->n= ame, p->len), dir); ovl_cache_update() is also called from ovl_iterate_merged() where inode is locked. > if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(this) || !this->d_inode) { > /* Mark a stale entry */ > p->is_whiteout =3D true; > @@ -666,11 +665,12 @@ static int ovl_dir_read_impure(const struct path *p= ath, struct list_head *list, > if (err) > return err; > > + inode_unlock(path->dentry->d_inode); > list_for_each_entry_safe(p, n, list, l_node) { > if (!name_is_dot_dotdot(p->name, p->len)) { > err =3D ovl_cache_update(path, p, true); > if (err) > - return err; > + break; > } > if (p->ino =3D=3D p->real_ino) { > list_del(&p->l_node); > @@ -680,14 +680,19 @@ static int ovl_dir_read_impure(const struct path *p= ath, struct list_head *list, > struct rb_node *parent =3D NULL; > > if (WARN_ON(ovl_cache_entry_find_link(p->name, p-= >len, > - &newp, &par= ent))) > - return -EIO; > + &newp, &par= ent))) { > + err =3D -EIO; > + break; > + } > > rb_link_node(&p->node, parent, newp); > rb_insert_color(&p->node, root); > } > } > - return 0; > + inode_lock(path->dentry->d_inode); > + if (IS_DEADDIR(path->dentry->d_inode)) > + err =3D -ENOENT; > + return err; > } > > static struct ovl_dir_cache *ovl_cache_get_impure(const struct path *pat= h) > -- You missed the fact that overlayfs uses the dir inode lock to protect the readdir inode cache, so your patch introduces a risk for storing a stale readdir cache when dir modify operations invalidate the readdir cache version while lock is dropped and also introduces memory leak when cache is stomped without freeing cache created by a competing thread. I think something like the untested patch below should fix this. I did not look into ovl_iterate_merged() to see if it has a simple fix and I am not 100% sure that this fix for impure dir is enough. Thanks, Amir. diff --git a/fs/overlayfs/readdir.c b/fs/overlayfs/readdir.c index d5123b37921c8..9e90064b252ce 100644 --- a/fs/overlayfs/readdir.c +++ b/fs/overlayfs/readdir.c @@ -702,15 +702,13 @@ static struct ovl_dir_cache *ovl_cache_get_impure(const struct path *path) struct inode *inode =3D d_inode(dentry); struct ovl_fs *ofs =3D OVL_FS(dentry->d_sb); struct ovl_dir_cache *cache; + /* Snapshot version before ovl_dir_read_impure() drops i_rwsem */ + u64 version =3D ovl_inode_version_get(inode); cache =3D ovl_dir_cache(inode); - if (cache && ovl_inode_version_get(inode) =3D=3D cache->version) + if (cache && version =3D=3D cache->version) return cache; - /* Impure cache is not refcounted, free it here */ - ovl_dir_cache_free(inode); - ovl_set_dir_cache(inode, NULL); - cache =3D kzalloc_obj(struct ovl_dir_cache); if (!cache) return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM); @@ -721,6 +719,14 @@ static struct ovl_dir_cache *ovl_cache_get_impure(const struct path *path) kfree(cache); return ERR_PTR(res); } + + /* + * Impure cache is not refcounted, free it here. + * Also frees cache stored by concurrent readdir during i_rwsem dro= p. + */ + ovl_dir_cache_free(inode); + ovl_set_dir_cache(inode, NULL); + if (list_empty(&cache->entries)) { /* * A good opportunity to get rid of an unneeded "impure" fl= ag. @@ -736,7 +742,7 @@ static struct ovl_dir_cache *ovl_cache_get_impure(const struct path *path) return NULL; } - cache->version =3D ovl_inode_version_get(inode); + cache->version =3D version; ovl_set_dir_cache(inode, cache); return cache;