Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-183648-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1;
Message-ID: <5b1b2719-2123-9218-97b4-ccda8b5cb3b4@huaweicloud.com>
Date: Mon, 20 May 2024 19:14:16 +0800
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.1.2
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 08/12] cachefiles: never get a new anonymous fd if
 ondemand_id is valid
Content-Language: en-US
To: Jingbo Xu <jefflexu@linux.alibaba.com>, netfs@lists.linux.dev,
 dhowells@redhat.com, jlayton@kernel.org
Cc: hsiangkao@linux.alibaba.com, zhujia.zj@bytedance.com,
 linux-erofs@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, yangerkun@huawei.com, houtao1@huawei.com,
 yukuai3@huawei.com, wozizhi@huawei.com, Baokun Li <libaokun1@huawei.com>,
 libaokun@huaweicloud.com
References: <20240515084601.3240503-1-libaokun@huaweicloud.com>
 <20240515084601.3240503-9-libaokun@huaweicloud.com>
 <f4d24738-76a2-4998-9a28-493599cd7eae@linux.alibaba.com>
 <d62b162d-acb3-2fa7-085e-79da3278091a@huaweicloud.com>
 <a3ca2292-0218-45f6-8afe-4319a10b69e2@linux.alibaba.com>
From: Baokun Li <libaokun@huaweicloud.com>
In-Reply-To: <a3ca2292-0218-45f6-8afe-4319a10b69e2@linux.alibaba.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

On 2024/5/20 17:24, Jingbo Xu wrote:
>
> On 5/20/24 5:07 PM, Baokun Li wrote:
>> On 2024/5/20 16:43, Jingbo Xu wrote:
>>> On 5/15/24 4:45 PM, libaokun@huaweicloud.com wrote:
>>>> From: Baokun Li <libaokun1@huawei.com>
>>>>
SNIP
>>>>
>>>> To avoid this, allocate a new anonymous fd only if no anonymous fd has
>>>> been allocated (ondemand_id == 0) or if the previously allocated
>>>> anonymous
>>>> fd has been closed (ondemand_id == -1). Moreover, returns an error if
>>>> ondemand_id is valid, letting the daemon know that the current userland
>>>> restore logic is abnormal and needs to be checked.
>>>>
>>>> Fixes: c8383054506c ("cachefiles: notify the user daemon when looking
>>>> up cookie")
>>>> Signed-off-by: Baokun Li <libaokun1@huawei.com>
>>> The LOCs of this fix is quite under control.  But still it seems that
>>> the worst consequence is that the (potential) malicious daemon gets
>>> hung.  No more effect to the system or other processes.  Or does a
>>> non-malicious daemon have any chance having the same issue?
>> If we enable hung_task_panic, it may cause panic to crash the server.
> Then this issue has nothing to do with this patch?  As long as a
> malicious daemon doesn't close the anonymous fd after umounting, then I
> guess a following attempt of mounting cookie with the same name will
> also wait and hung there?
>
Yes, a daemon that only reads requests but doesn't process them will
cause hung，but the daemon will obey the basic constraints when we
test it.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Baokun Li