Re: [PATCH 16/53] ovl: drop dir lock for lookups in impure readdir
Amir Goldstein <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | org.kernel.vger.linux-unionfs,org.kernel.vger.linux-fsdevel,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAOQ4uxgvD3COuoD5r67CfpYSiRFSr0LY5TB-QPcSn-zD9Ht1HQ@mail.gmail.com> |
On Wed, Mar 18, 2026 at 10:10 PM NeilBrown <[email protected]> wrote: > > [[ CC list trimmed ]] > > On Mon, 16 Mar 2026, Amir Goldstein wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 12, 2026 at 10:49 PM NeilBrown <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > From: NeilBrown <[email protected]> > > > > > > When performing an "impure" readdir, ovl needs to perform a lookup on some > > > 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 == 2) { > > > - /* we shall not be moved */ > > > - this = dget(dir->d_parent); > > > + this = dget_parent(dir); > > > goto get; > > > } > > > } > > > /* This checks also for xwhiteouts */ > > > - this = lookup_one(mnt_idmap(path->mnt), &QSTR_LEN(p->name, p->len), dir); > > > + this = lookup_one_unlocked(mnt_idmap(path->mnt), &QSTR_LEN(p->name, 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 = true; > > > @@ -666,11 +665,12 @@ static int ovl_dir_read_impure(const struct path *path, 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 = ovl_cache_update(path, p, true); > > > if (err) > > > - return err; > > > + break; > > > } > > > if (p->ino == p->real_ino) { > > > list_del(&p->l_node); > > > @@ -680,14 +680,19 @@ static int ovl_dir_read_impure(const struct path *path, struct list_head *list, > > > struct rb_node *parent = NULL; > > > > > > if (WARN_ON(ovl_cache_entry_find_link(p->name, p->len, > > > - &newp, &parent))) > > > - return -EIO; > > > + &newp, &parent))) { > > > + err = -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 = -ENOENT; > > > + return err; > > > } > > > > > > static struct ovl_dir_cache *ovl_cache_get_impure(const struct path *path) > > > -- > > > > 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. > > Yes, I did miss that - thanks. I think I missed a few other details too. > I no longer think it can be safe to drop the lock without substantial > rewrites - and even then maybe not. > > So I'm considering a different approach. > This patch demonstrates what I'm thinking, though it still needs work I > think. I like this direction. I always thought that we need to get rid of this vfs lookup inside readdir but I thought it would be a lot of work. Your suggestion walks around this in an elegant way. > > Thanks, > NeilBrown > > From: NeilBrown <[email protected]> > Subject: [PATCH] ovl: stop using lookup_one() in iterate_shared() handling. > > lookup_one() is expected to be removed as it does not fit well with > proposed changes to directory locking. > Specifically d_alloc_parallel() will be ordered outside of i_rwsem > and as iterate_shared() is called with i_rwsem held it is not safe > to call d_alloc_parallel(). > > We can instead call d_alloc_noblock() and then call the ->lookup, but > that can fail if there is a lookup attempt concurrent with the > readdir(). > > ovl cannot afford for the lookup to fail as that could produce incorrect > results, and it cannot safely drop i_rwsem temporarily and that could > introduce races with handling of the directory cache. > > Instead we rely on the fact that ovl_iterate() has an exclusive lock on > the directory, so any concurrent lookup will wait for the ovl_iterate() > call to complete. We allocate a separate dentry and if the lookup is > successful, it is hashed with the result. > > When the concurrent lookup gets i_rwsem it mustn't do its own lookup - > it must use the existing dentry. This is done using > try_lookup_noperm(). To manage overheads we keep a counter of the > number of "Stray dentries" there might be on each directory and only > check for one when this count is non zero. > > If a 'stray dentry' were discarded for any reason before the concurrent > lookup completed, the count would never reach zero. That might be a problem. Can we deal with the discarded dentries using OVL_E_FLAGS() for a stray ovl dentry implement the relevant ovl_dentry_operations to decrement the stray counter? Thanks, Amir. > > Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <[email protected]> > --- > fs/overlayfs/namei.c | 12 ++++++++++++ > fs/overlayfs/ovl_entry.h | 1 + > fs/overlayfs/readdir.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-- > fs/overlayfs/super.c | 1 + > 4 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/overlayfs/namei.c b/fs/overlayfs/namei.c > index d8dd4b052984..c3ff57047712 100644 > --- a/fs/overlayfs/namei.c > +++ b/fs/overlayfs/namei.c > @@ -1399,6 +1399,18 @@ struct dentry *ovl_lookup(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry, > if (dentry->d_name.len > ofs->namelen) > return ERR_PTR(-ENAMETOOLONG); > > + if (atomic_read(&OVL_I(dir)->stray_dentries) && d_in_lookup(dentry)) { > + /* This dentry might have forced readdir to do the lookup */ > + struct dentry *alias = > + try_lookup_noperm(&QSTR_LEN(dentry->d_name.name, > + dentry->d_name.len), > + dentry->d_parent); > + if (alias && !IS_ERR(alias)) { > + atomic_dec(&OVL_I(dir)->stray_dentries); > + return alias; > + } > + } > + > with_ovl_creds(dentry->d_sb) > err = ovl_lookup_layers(&ctx, &d); > > diff --git a/fs/overlayfs/ovl_entry.h b/fs/overlayfs/ovl_entry.h > index 1d4828dbcf7a..0e7751d5dfca 100644 > --- a/fs/overlayfs/ovl_entry.h > +++ b/fs/overlayfs/ovl_entry.h > @@ -172,6 +172,7 @@ struct ovl_inode { > struct inode vfs_inode; > struct dentry *__upperdentry; > struct ovl_entry *oe; > + atomic_t stray_dentries; /* directory */ > > /* synchronize copy up and more */ > struct mutex lock; > diff --git a/fs/overlayfs/readdir.c b/fs/overlayfs/readdir.c > index 1dcc75b3a90f..add556a0a2b6 100644 > --- a/fs/overlayfs/readdir.c > +++ b/fs/overlayfs/readdir.c > @@ -557,6 +557,7 @@ static int ovl_cache_update(const struct path *path, struct ovl_cache_entry *p, > enum ovl_path_type type; > u64 ino = p->real_ino; > int xinobits = ovl_xino_bits(ofs); > + bool did_alloc = false; > int err = 0; > > if (!ovl_same_dev(ofs) && !p->check_xwhiteout) > @@ -574,8 +575,29 @@ static int ovl_cache_update(const struct path *path, struct ovl_cache_entry *p, > } > } > /* This checks also for xwhiteouts */ > - this = lookup_one(mnt_idmap(path->mnt), &QSTR_LEN(p->name, p->len), dir); > - if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(this) || !this->d_inode) { > + this = d_alloc_noblock(dir, &QSTR_LEN(p->name, p->len)); > + if (this == ERR_PTR(-EWOULDBLOCK)) { > + /* > + * Some other thread is looking up this name and will block > + * on i_rwsem before they can complete the lookup. > + * We will do the lookup and when that lookup gets a turn it > + * will return this dentry. > + */ > + this = d_alloc_name(dir, p->name); > + did_alloc = true; > + } > + if (!IS_ERR(this) && !d_unhashed(this)) { > + /* Either we got in-lookup or we made our own unhashed */ > + struct dentry *alias = ovl_lookup(dir->d_inode, this, 0); > + if (alias) { > + d_lookup_done(this); > + dput(this); > + this = alias; > + } else if (did_alloc) { > + atomic_inc(&OVL_I(dir->d_inode)->stray_dentries); > + } > + } > + if (IS_ERR(this) || !this->d_inode) { > /* Mark a stale entry */ > p->is_whiteout = true; > if (IS_ERR(this)) { > diff --git a/fs/overlayfs/super.c b/fs/overlayfs/super.c > index d4c12feec039..172d3ac7d3e2 100644 > --- a/fs/overlayfs/super.c > +++ b/fs/overlayfs/super.c > @@ -195,6 +195,7 @@ static struct inode *ovl_alloc_inode(struct super_block *sb) > oi->__upperdentry = NULL; > oi->lowerdata_redirect = NULL; > oi->oe = NULL; > + atomic_set(&oi->stray_dentries, 0); > mutex_init(&oi->lock); > > return &oi->vfs_inode; > -- > 2.50.0.107.gf914562f5916.dirty >