diff mbox series

VFS: generate FS_CREATE before FS_OPEN when ->atomic_open used.

Message ID 171815791109.14261.10223988071271993465@noble.neil.brown.name (mailing list archive)
State New
Headers show
Series VFS: generate FS_CREATE before FS_OPEN when ->atomic_open used. | expand

Commit Message

NeilBrown June 12, 2024, 2:05 a.m. UTC
When a file is opened and created with open(..., O_CREAT) we get
both the CREATE and OPEN fsnotify events and would expect them in that
order.   For most filesystems we get them in that order because
open_last_lookups() calls fsnofify_create() and then do_open() (from
path_openat()) calls vfs_open()->do_dentry_open() which calls
fsnotify_open().

However when ->atomic_open is used, the
   do_dentry_open() -> fsnotify_open()
call happens from finish_open() which is called from the ->atomic_open
handler in lookup_open() which is called *before* open_last_lookups()
calls fsnotify_create().  So we get the "open" notification before
"create" - which is backwards.  ltp testcase inotify02 tests this and
reports the inconsistency.

This patch lifts the fsnotify_open() call out of do_dentry_open() and
places it higher up the call stack.  There are three callers of
do_dentry_open().

For vfs_open() and kernel_file_open() the fsnotify_open() is placed
directly in that caller so there should be no behavioural change.

For finish_open() there are three cases:
 - finish_open is used in ->atomic_open handlers.  For these we add a
   call to fsnotify_open() in do_open() if FMODE_OPENED is set - which
   means do_dentry_open() has been called. This happens after fsnotify_create().
 - finish_open is used in ->tmpfile() handlers.  For these a call to
   fsnotify_open() is added to vfs_tmpfile()
 - finish_open is used in gfs2_create_inode() which is used for
   atomic_open, but also for gfs2_create() which is a ->create handler
   and is not expected to open the file.  So losing the fsnotify_open()
   call in this case seems correct.

With this patch NFSv3 is restored to its previous behaviour (before
->atomic_open support was added) of generating CREATE notifications
before OPEN, and NFSv4 now has that same correct ordering that is has
not had before.  I haven't tested other filesystems.

Fixes: 7c6c5249f061 ("NFS: add atomic_open for NFSv3 to handle O_TRUNC correctly.")
Reported-by: James Clark <james.clark@arm.com>
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/01c3bf2e-eb1f-4b7f-a54f-d2a05dd3d8c8@arm.com
Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
---
 fs/namei.c |  9 +++++++--
 fs/open.c  | 19 ++++++++++++-------
 2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

Comments

Al Viro June 12, 2024, 2:37 a.m. UTC | #1
On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 12:05:11PM +1000, NeilBrown wrote:

> For finish_open() there are three cases:
>  - finish_open is used in ->atomic_open handlers.  For these we add a
>    call to fsnotify_open() in do_open() if FMODE_OPENED is set - which
>    means do_dentry_open() has been called. This happens after fsnotify_create().

	Hummm....  There's a bit of behaviour change; in case we fail in
may_open(), we used to get fsnotify_open()+fsnotify_close() and with that
patch we's get fsnotify_close() alone.

	IF we don't care about that, we might as well take fsnotify_open()
out of vfs_open() and, for do_open()/do_tmpfile()/do_o_path(), into
path_openat() itself.  I mean, having
        if (likely(!error)) {
                if (likely(file->f_mode & FMODE_OPENED)) {
			fsnotify_open(file);
                        return file;
		}
in there would be a lot easier to follow...  It would lose fsnotify_open()
in a few more failure exits, but if we don't give a damn about having it
paired with fsnotify_close()...
NeilBrown June 12, 2024, 2:55 a.m. UTC | #2
On Wed, 12 Jun 2024, Al Viro wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 12:05:11PM +1000, NeilBrown wrote:
> 
> > For finish_open() there are three cases:
> >  - finish_open is used in ->atomic_open handlers.  For these we add a
> >    call to fsnotify_open() in do_open() if FMODE_OPENED is set - which
> >    means do_dentry_open() has been called. This happens after fsnotify_create().
> 
> 	Hummm....  There's a bit of behaviour change; in case we fail in
> may_open(), we used to get fsnotify_open()+fsnotify_close() and with that
> patch we's get fsnotify_close() alone.

True.  Presumably we could fix that by doing
diff --git a/fs/namei.c b/fs/namei.c
index 37fb0a8aa09a..6fd04c9046fa 100644
--- a/fs/namei.c
+++ b/fs/namei.c
@@ -3645,6 +3645,8 @@ static int do_open(struct nameidata *nd,
 			return error;
 		do_truncate = true;
 	}
+	if (file->f_mode & FMODE_OPENED)
+		fsnotify_open(file);
 	error = may_open(idmap, &nd->path, acc_mode, open_flag);
 	if (!error && !(file->f_mode & FMODE_OPENED))
 		error = vfs_open(&nd->path, file);
@@ -3702,6 +3704,7 @@ int vfs_tmpfile(struct mnt_idmap *idmap,
 	dput(child);
 	if (error)
 		return error;
+	fsnotify_open(file);
 	/* Don't check for other permissions, the inode was just created */
 	error = may_open(idmap, &file->f_path, 0, file->f_flags);
 	if (error)

instead, but it seems a little weird sending an OPEN notification if
may_open() fails.

> 
> 	IF we don't care about that, we might as well take fsnotify_open()
> out of vfs_open() and, for do_open()/do_tmpfile()/do_o_path(), into
> path_openat() itself.  I mean, having
>         if (likely(!error)) {
>                 if (likely(file->f_mode & FMODE_OPENED)) {
> 			fsnotify_open(file);
>                         return file;
> 		}
> in there would be a lot easier to follow...  It would lose fsnotify_open()
> in a few more failure exits, but if we don't give a damn about having it
> paired with fsnotify_close()...
> 

Should we have fsnotify_open() set a new ->f_mode flag, and
fsnotify_close() abort if it isn't set (and clear it if it is)?
Then we would be guaranteed a balance - which does seem like a good
idea.

Thanks,
NeilBrown
Al Viro June 12, 2024, 3:14 a.m. UTC | #3
On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 12:55:40PM +1000, NeilBrown wrote:
> > 	IF we don't care about that, we might as well take fsnotify_open()
> > out of vfs_open() and, for do_open()/do_tmpfile()/do_o_path(), into
> > path_openat() itself.  I mean, having
> >         if (likely(!error)) {
> >                 if (likely(file->f_mode & FMODE_OPENED)) {
> > 			fsnotify_open(file);
> >                         return file;
> > 		}
> > in there would be a lot easier to follow...  It would lose fsnotify_open()
> > in a few more failure exits, but if we don't give a damn about having it
> > paired with fsnotify_close()...
> > 
> 
> Should we have fsnotify_open() set a new ->f_mode flag, and
> fsnotify_close() abort if it isn't set (and clear it if it is)?
> Then we would be guaranteed a balance - which does seem like a good
> idea.

Umm...  In that case, I would rather have FMODE_NONOTIFY set just before
the fput() in path_openat() - no need to grab another flag from ->f_mode
(not a lot of unused ones there) and no need to add any overhead on
the fast path.
NeilBrown June 12, 2024, 7:08 a.m. UTC | #4
On Wed, 12 Jun 2024, Al Viro wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 12:55:40PM +1000, NeilBrown wrote:
> > > 	IF we don't care about that, we might as well take fsnotify_open()
> > > out of vfs_open() and, for do_open()/do_tmpfile()/do_o_path(), into
> > > path_openat() itself.  I mean, having
> > >         if (likely(!error)) {
> > >                 if (likely(file->f_mode & FMODE_OPENED)) {
> > > 			fsnotify_open(file);
> > >                         return file;
> > > 		}
> > > in there would be a lot easier to follow...  It would lose fsnotify_open()
> > > in a few more failure exits, but if we don't give a damn about having it
> > > paired with fsnotify_close()...
> > > 
> > 
> > Should we have fsnotify_open() set a new ->f_mode flag, and
> > fsnotify_close() abort if it isn't set (and clear it if it is)?
> > Then we would be guaranteed a balance - which does seem like a good
> > idea.
> 
> Umm...  In that case, I would rather have FMODE_NONOTIFY set just before
> the fput() in path_openat() - no need to grab another flag from ->f_mode
> (not a lot of unused ones there) and no need to add any overhead on
> the fast path.
> 

Unfortunately that gets messy if handle_truncate() fails.  We would need
to delay the fsnotify_open() until after truncate which means moving it
out of vfs_open() or maybe calling do_dentry_open() directly from
do_open() - neither of which I like.

I think it is best to stick with "if FMODE_OPENED is set, then we call
fsnotify_open() even if the open will fail", and only move the place
where fsnotify_open() is called.

BTW I was wrong about gfs.  Closer inspection of the code show that
finish_open() is only called in the ->atomic_open case.

Thanks,
NeilBrown
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/fs/namei.c b/fs/namei.c
index 37fb0a8aa09a..32031feaf6b6 100644
--- a/fs/namei.c
+++ b/fs/namei.c
@@ -3646,8 +3646,12 @@  static int do_open(struct nameidata *nd,
 		do_truncate = true;
 	}
 	error = may_open(idmap, &nd->path, acc_mode, open_flag);
-	if (!error && !(file->f_mode & FMODE_OPENED))
-		error = vfs_open(&nd->path, file);
+	if (!error) {
+		if (file->f_mode & FMODE_OPENED)
+			fsnotify_open(file);
+		else
+			error = vfs_open(&nd->path, file);
+	}
 	if (!error)
 		error = security_file_post_open(file, op->acc_mode);
 	if (!error && do_truncate)
@@ -3706,6 +3710,7 @@  int vfs_tmpfile(struct mnt_idmap *idmap,
 	error = may_open(idmap, &file->f_path, 0, file->f_flags);
 	if (error)
 		return error;
+	fsnotify_open(file);
 	inode = file_inode(file);
 	if (!(open_flag & O_EXCL)) {
 		spin_lock(&inode->i_lock);
diff --git a/fs/open.c b/fs/open.c
index 89cafb572061..970f299c0e77 100644
--- a/fs/open.c
+++ b/fs/open.c
@@ -1004,11 +1004,6 @@  static int do_dentry_open(struct file *f,
 		}
 	}
 
-	/*
-	 * Once we return a file with FMODE_OPENED, __fput() will call
-	 * fsnotify_close(), so we need fsnotify_open() here for symmetry.
-	 */
-	fsnotify_open(f);
 	return 0;
 
 cleanup_all:
@@ -1085,8 +1080,17 @@  EXPORT_SYMBOL(file_path);
  */
 int vfs_open(const struct path *path, struct file *file)
 {
+	int ret;
+
 	file->f_path = *path;
-	return do_dentry_open(file, NULL);
+	ret = do_dentry_open(file, NULL);
+	if (!ret)
+		/*
+		 * Once we return a file with FMODE_OPENED, __fput() will call
+		 * fsnotify_close(), so we need fsnotify_open() here for symmetry.
+		 */
+		fsnotify_open(file);
+	return ret;
 }
 
 struct file *dentry_open(const struct path *path, int flags,
@@ -1178,7 +1182,8 @@  struct file *kernel_file_open(const struct path *path, int flags,
 	if (error) {
 		fput(f);
 		f = ERR_PTR(error);
-	}
+	} else
+		fsnotify_open(f);
 	return f;
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kernel_file_open);