From patchwork Fri Jun 28 06:29:30 2024 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Baokun Li X-Patchwork-Id: 13715522 Received: from dggsgout11.his.huawei.com (dggsgout11.his.huawei.com [45.249.212.51]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B962B78B60; Fri, 28 Jun 2024 06:31:08 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.249.212.51 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1719556270; cv=none; b=bVhC85Kh/tuEOz3YcPwCFEiNJTQl4KnO4jRPJxMbK1VnMCGIFv5dzvU2E1xP1riQO8vZuoqu0FMhu+plfNSrN+FR0v/6uLAs/7OLdA9ZZgc4zhAaWpi95Jb9SIjh2P6NOYiHjq+bX354qP9cCEIo35x/e25fKCNX6EcAeDHUeL0= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1719556270; c=relaxed/simple; bh=gqwYSNYOez5FoSMhBBxLT9PwTJsluXDHkon4rB6Ozwg=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-Id:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version; b=R1clhDtyw7zpW+Kc2se+4KZHXiVkbzKQWaztGYl+9gXTJ3BSZ8aqWTWbUopTnt07bnHk+XXeNsaF2FkmdXvn0d9ifim4EjBSrShZP4Ix2AZ+RCoOSbnAFxDHkSjTCw7wjWt2IGriqWI/8b4IfpfO0/cTeN0RLKbV0NhBgdvogKI= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=huaweicloud.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huaweicloud.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.249.212.51 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=huaweicloud.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huaweicloud.com Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.19.93.142]) by dggsgout11.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4W9QYT2S8Tz4f3l1s; Fri, 28 Jun 2024 14:30:53 +0800 (CST) Received: from mail02.huawei.com (unknown [10.116.40.75]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9265A1A0185; Fri, 28 Jun 2024 14:31:05 +0800 (CST) Received: from huaweicloud.com (unknown [10.175.104.67]) by APP2 (Coremail) with SMTP id Syh0CgBXwIWfWH5mZZVAAg--.52859S13; Fri, 28 Jun 2024 14:31:05 +0800 (CST) From: libaokun@huaweicloud.com To: netfs@lists.linux.dev, dhowells@redhat.com, jlayton@kernel.org Cc: hsiangkao@linux.alibaba.com, jefflexu@linux.alibaba.com, zhujia.zj@bytedance.com, linux-erofs@lists.ozlabs.org, brauner@kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, libaokun@huaweicloud.com, yangerkun@huawei.com, houtao1@huawei.com, yukuai3@huawei.com, wozizhi@huawei.com, Baokun Li Subject: [PATCH v3 9/9] cachefiles: add missing lock protection when polling Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2024 14:29:30 +0800 Message-Id: <20240628062930.2467993-10-libaokun@huaweicloud.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.39.2 In-Reply-To: <20240628062930.2467993-1-libaokun@huaweicloud.com> References: <20240628062930.2467993-1-libaokun@huaweicloud.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CM-TRANSID: Syh0CgBXwIWfWH5mZZVAAg--.52859S13 X-Coremail-Antispam: 1UD129KBjvJXoW7tF4rWr4Dtr4furW3uw4rZrb_yoW8WrWfpF WSya45try8ur48uF1qv3WkA34FyaykGa4DW3ykXwsIv3srXr15XF1Sk34a9rn5Jr4kAF43 Jw15KF9xA3yUA3DanT9S1TB71UUUUUUqnTZGkaVYY2UrUUUUjbIjqfuFe4nvWSU5nxnvy2 9KBjDU0xBIdaVrnRJUUUm014x267AKxVWrJVCq3wAFc2x0x2IEx4CE42xK8VAvwI8IcIk0 rVWrJVCq3wAFIxvE14AKwVWUJVWUGwA2048vs2IY020E87I2jVAFwI0_JF0E3s1l82xGYI kIc2x26xkF7I0E14v26ryj6s0DM28lY4IEw2IIxxk0rwA2F7IY1VAKz4vEj48ve4kI8wA2 z4x0Y4vE2Ix0cI8IcVAFwI0_Ar0_tr1l84ACjcxK6xIIjxv20xvEc7CjxVAFwI0_Cr1j6r xdM28EF7xvwVC2z280aVAFwI0_GcCE3s1l84ACjcxK6I8E87Iv6xkF7I0E14v26rxl6s0D M2AIxVAIcxkEcVAq07x20xvEncxIr21l5I8CrVACY4xI64kE6c02F40Ex7xfMcIj6xIIjx v20xvE14v26r1j6r18McIj6I8E87Iv67AKxVWUJVW8JwAm72CE4IkC6x0Yz7v_Jr0_Gr1l F7xvr2IYc2Ij64vIr41lF7I21c0EjII2zVCS5cI20VAGYxC7M4IIrI8v6xkF7I0E8cxan2 IY04v7M4kE6xkIj40Ew7xC0wCF04k20xvY0x0EwIxGrwCFx2IqxVCFs4IE7xkEbVWUJVW8 JwC20s026c02F40E14v26r1j6r18MI8I3I0E7480Y4vE14v26r106r1rMI8E67AF67kF1V AFwI0_GFv_WrylIxkGc2Ij64vIr41lIxAIcVC0I7IYx2IY67AKxVWUCVW8JwCI42IY6xII jxv20xvEc7CjxVAFwI0_Gr1j6F4UJwCI42IY6xAIw20EY4v20xvaj40_Jr0_JF4lIxAIcV C2z280aVAFwI0_Gr0_Cr1lIxAIcVC2z280aVCY1x0267AKxVW8Jr0_Cr1UYxBIdaVFxhVj vjDU0xZFpf9x0JUB89_UUUUU= X-CM-SenderInfo: 5olet0hnxqqx5xdzvxpfor3voofrz/1tbiAQAIBV1jkH-xKAADsH From: Jingbo Xu Add missing lock protection in poll routine when iterating xarray, otherwise: Even with RCU read lock held, only the slot of the radix tree is ensured to be pinned there, while the data structure (e.g. struct cachefiles_req) stored in the slot has no such guarantee. The poll routine will iterate the radix tree and dereference cachefiles_req accordingly. Thus RCU read lock is not adequate in this case and spinlock is needed here. Fixes: b817e22b2e91 ("cachefiles: narrow the scope of triggering EPOLLIN events in ondemand mode") Signed-off-by: Jingbo Xu Signed-off-by: Baokun Li Reviewed-by: Jia Zhu Reviewed-by: Gao Xiang Acked-by: Jeff Layton --- fs/cachefiles/daemon.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/cachefiles/daemon.c b/fs/cachefiles/daemon.c index 06cdf1a8a16f..89b11336a836 100644 --- a/fs/cachefiles/daemon.c +++ b/fs/cachefiles/daemon.c @@ -366,14 +366,14 @@ static __poll_t cachefiles_daemon_poll(struct file *file, if (cachefiles_in_ondemand_mode(cache)) { if (!xa_empty(&cache->reqs)) { - rcu_read_lock(); + xas_lock(&xas); xas_for_each_marked(&xas, req, ULONG_MAX, CACHEFILES_REQ_NEW) { if (!cachefiles_ondemand_is_reopening_read(req)) { mask |= EPOLLIN; break; } } - rcu_read_unlock(); + xas_unlock(&xas); } } else { if (test_bit(CACHEFILES_STATE_CHANGED, &cache->flags))