Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <bb92b1f4-8433-de5c-0ce1-b23e693b8ad5@linux.alibaba.com>
Date:   Fri, 16 Jun 2023 10:11:21 +0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:102.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.11.2
Subject: Re: [BUG] ocfs2/dlm: possible data races in
 dlm_drop_lockres_ref_done() and dlm_get_lock_resource()
To:     Tuo Li <islituo@gmail.com>, mark@fasheh.com, jlbec@evilplan.org,
        akpm@linux-foundation.org
Cc:     ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com,
        Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        baijiaju1990@outlook.com
References: <CADm8TekHVfLHzKBLRfj7TwZiw=eL=VSgPpuhdpx_FSjNUXNtHQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Language: en-US
From:   Joseph Qi <joseph.qi@linux.alibaba.com>
In-Reply-To: <CADm8TekHVfLHzKBLRfj7TwZiw=eL=VSgPpuhdpx_FSjNUXNtHQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

Hi,

On 6/13/23 4:23 PM, Tuo Li wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> Our static analysis tool finds some possible data races in the OCFS2 file
> system in Linux 6.4.0-rc6.
> 
> In most calling contexts, the variables  such as res->lockname.name and
> res->owner are accessed with holding the lock res->spinlock. Here is an
> example:
> 
>   lockres_seq_start() --> Line 539 in dlmdebug.c
>     spin_lock(&res->spinlock); --> Line 574 in dlmdebug.c (Lock
> res->spinlock)
>     dump_lockres(res, ...); --> Line 575 in fs/ocfs2/dlm/dlmdebug.c
>       stringify_lockname(res->lockname.name, ...);  --> Line 493 in
> dlmdebug.c (Access res->lockname.name)
>       scnprintf(..., res->owner, ...);  -->Line 498 in dlmdebug.c (Access
> res->owner)
> 
> However, in the following calling contexts:
> 
>   dlm_deref_lockres_worker() --> Line 2439 in dlmmaster.c
>     dlm_drop_lockres_ref_done() --> Line 2459 in dlmmaster.c
>       lockname = res->lockname.name; --> Line 2416 in dlmmaster.c (Access
> res->lockname.name)

lockname won't changed during the lockres lifecycle.
So this won't cause any real problem since now it holds a reference.

> 
>   dlm_get_lock_resource() --> Line 701 in dlmmaster.c
>     if (res->owner != dlm->node_num) --> Line 1023 in dlmmaster.c (Access
> res->owner)

Do you mean in dlm_wait_for_lock_mastery()?
Even if owner changes suddenly, it will recheck, so I think it is also fine.

Thanks,
Joseph

> 
> The variables res->lockname.name and res->owner are accessed respectively
> without holding the lock res->spinlock, and thus data races can occur.
> 
> I am not quite sure whether these possible data races are real and how to
> fix
> them if they are real.
> 
> Any feedback would be appreciated, thanks!
> 
> Reported-by: BassCheck <bass@buaa.edu.cn> <bass@buaa.edu.cn>
> 
> Best wishes,
> Tuo Li
>