Received: by 2002:a25:31c3:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id x186csp3106577ybx; Sun, 3 Nov 2019 10:55:09 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxtw4WYKDQ+dBoxirrcMQp/JEwtqcGk4m5N7GfQGU1E2HrkslHGYYAQw1GEfruOa1fJZJty X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:2599:: with SMTP id m25mr19500641ejb.227.1572807309160; Sun, 03 Nov 2019 10:55:09 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1572807309; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=TvL0ckNnCtBeizohkgjhmtoHr2A1NIEzdqCkvwR5JUX4iVP8KZMoQWVNIZqrk7RnfN onpb8JD3GXnLMhJFDw6PrxAQBMsbViWWZ1oe0aXb4QGfurxbIOIonA5/URhNbHvRGwEI BNZn+VjvfDnACbrhD0Wnb+Y1+5/VNvN4B8vNbXTliH3VxK83BzxiRybKYTW68+90DQet aKuiFKKeG5ICVq/ATjKZ00+Ii/TDLLf0mR+qOudVHsk9BANBrQaH67G/By+Mbt6dxPC4 8erPV7mHbW5cI4NkhMcO2gupRy9g5sEJ514CEqws1xWwWOR9uBepuup6BBc54yebSUC7 3gBw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date; bh=9T67zNOrRSfbFqkjis14M4bQPC1m+973RtryWi7+zvk=; b=a+8bGm94bQJeKNoPXIcM43kxlazRxApf6GZD9fUVf17uREFolwrbcZQR/juiF/tU6O OkF9jxa66LZNHGTj8cySSSLPfnRwd9qZczZXYyCu34M3ErEjB924rbZtRQsp8LV9SiYc h72wiHGh5tLyd/zLVpY4ZmzBMl38DETZ+iSN5++K/pJyuMjDQ+hr5ro9l5VTjdJvQzBq s4QbqbEVGZFide0e9U7jm2WFiezssQ4dmgNav9J+zv08fWst0z6uu4OJVYHJpJ5S7Na8 FsSpYTkOGJi1uSgwvFKgedymzOHxZrQOgGjMGMH6BPMyDTIXHdIVSiLhXDAbCAdxzHKh OD7Q== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id a40si5494241eda.86.2019.11.03.10.54.45; Sun, 03 Nov 2019 10:55:09 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728061AbfKCSvg (ORCPT + 99 others); Sun, 3 Nov 2019 13:51:36 -0500 Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk ([195.92.253.2]:40794 "EHLO ZenIV.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727322AbfKCSvg (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Nov 2019 13:51:36 -0500 Received: from viro by ZenIV.linux.org.uk with local (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1iRKyL-0003ah-Hr; Sun, 03 Nov 2019 18:51:33 +0000 Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2019 18:51:33 +0000 From: Al Viro To: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Ritesh Harjani , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, wugyuan@cn.ibm.com, jlayton@kernel.org, hsiangkao@aol.com, Jan Kara , Linus Torvalds , ecryptfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH][RFC] =?iso-8859-1?Q?ecryptfs=5Floo?= =?iso-8859-1?B?a3VwX2ludGVycG9zZSgpOqBsb3dlcl9kZW50cnktPmRfaW5vZA==?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?e?= is not stable Message-ID: <20191103185133.GR26530@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <20191015040730.6A84742047@d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com> <20191022133855.B1B4752050@d06av21.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com> <20191022143736.GX26530@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20191022201131.GZ26530@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20191023110551.D04AE4C044@d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com> <20191101234622.GM26530@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20191102172229.GT20975@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> <20191102180842.GN26530@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20191103163524.GO26530@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20191103182058.GQ26530@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20191103182058.GQ26530@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.1 (2019-06-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org lower_dentry can't go from positive to negative (we have it pinned), but it *can* go from negative to positive. So fetching ->d_inode into a local variable, doing a blocking allocation, checking that now ->d_inode is non-NULL and feeding the value we'd fetched earlier to a function that won't accept NULL is not a good idea. Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- diff --git a/fs/ecryptfs/inode.c b/fs/ecryptfs/inode.c index a905d5f4f3b0..3c2298721359 100644 --- a/fs/ecryptfs/inode.c +++ b/fs/ecryptfs/inode.c @@ -319,7 +319,7 @@ static int ecryptfs_i_size_read(struct dentry *dentry, struct inode *inode) static struct dentry *ecryptfs_lookup_interpose(struct dentry *dentry, struct dentry *lower_dentry) { - struct inode *inode, *lower_inode = d_inode(lower_dentry); + struct inode *inode, *lower_inode; struct ecryptfs_dentry_info *dentry_info; struct vfsmount *lower_mnt; int rc = 0; @@ -339,7 +339,15 @@ static struct dentry *ecryptfs_lookup_interpose(struct dentry *dentry, dentry_info->lower_path.mnt = lower_mnt; dentry_info->lower_path.dentry = lower_dentry; - if (d_really_is_negative(lower_dentry)) { + /* + * negative dentry can go positive under us here - its parent is not + * locked. That's OK and that could happen just as we return from + * ecryptfs_lookup() anyway. Just need to be careful and fetch + * ->d_inode only once - it's not stable here. + */ + lower_inode = READ_ONCE(lower_dentry->d_inode); + + if (!lower_inode) { /* We want to add because we couldn't find in lower */ d_add(dentry, NULL); return NULL;