Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Mon, 3 Oct 2022 09:55:03 +0200
From:   Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
To:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
Cc:     Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
        Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
        "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
        John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, nvdimm@lists.linux.dev,
        linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 05/18] xfs: Add xfs_break_layouts() to the inode
 eviction path
Message-ID: <20221003075503.k7h6aqvlnoi5bo52@quack3>
References: <20220923001846.GX3600936@dread.disaster.area>
 <632d00a491d0d_4a67429488@dwillia2-xfh.jf.intel.com.notmuch>
 <20220923021012.GZ3600936@dread.disaster.area>
 <20220923093803.nroajmvn7twuptez@quack3>
 <20220925235407.GA3600936@dread.disaster.area>
 <20220926141055.sdlm3hkfepa7azf2@quack3>
 <63362b4781294_795a6294f0@dwillia2-xfh.jf.intel.com.notmuch>
 <20220930134144.pd67rbgahzcb62mf@quack3>
 <63372dcbc7f13_739029490@dwillia2-mobl3.amr.corp.intel.com.notmuch>
 <YzcwN67+QOqXpvfg@nvidia.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <YzcwN67+QOqXpvfg@nvidia.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Fri 30-09-22 15:06:47, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 10:56:27AM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> > Jan Kara wrote:
> > [..]
> > > I agree this is doable but there's the nasty sideeffect that inode reclaim
> > > may block for abitrary time waiting for page pinning. If the application
> > > that has pinned the page requires __GFP_FS memory allocation to get to a
> > > point where it releases the page, we even have a deadlock possibility.
> > > So it's better than the UAF issue but still not ideal.
> > 
> > I expect VMA pinning would have similar deadlock exposure if pinning a
> > VMA keeps the inode allocated. Anything that puts a page-pin release
> > dependency in the inode freeing path can potentially deadlock a reclaim
> > event that depends on that inode being freed.
> 
> I think the desire would be to go from the VMA to an inode_get and
> hold the inode reference for the from the pin_user_pages() to the
> unpin_user_page(), ie prevent it from being freed in the first place.

Yes, that was the idea how to avoid UAF problems.

> It is a fine idea, the trouble is just the high complexity to get
> there.
> 
> However, I wonder if the trucate/hole punch paths have the same
> deadlock problem?

Do you mean someone requiring say truncate(2) to complete on file F in
order to unpin pages of F? That is certainly a deadlock but it has always
worked this way for DAX so at least applications knowingly targetted at DAX
will quickly notice and avoid such unwise dependency ;).

								Honza

-- 
Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>
SUSE Labs, CR