Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1563985
| From | Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: fs, net: deadlock between bind/splice on af_unix |
| Date | 2017-01-21 00:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <t1Qk2-4MH-15@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | (5 earlier) <sMnai-8nx-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <t0bVE-6TE-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <t0Juh-3NG-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <t0UJ3-2cD-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <t1zsR-2DW-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 5:57 AM, Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> > Why do we do autobind there, anyway, and why is it conditional on >>>>>> > SOCK_PASSCRED? Note that e.g. for SOCK_STREAM we can bloody well get >>>>>> > to sending stuff without autobind ever done - just use socketpair() >>>>>> > to create that sucker and we won't be going through the connect() >>>>>> > at all. >>>>>> >>>>>> In the case Dmitry reported, unix_dgram_sendmsg() calls unix_autobind(), >>>>>> not SOCK_STREAM. >>>>> >>>>> Yes, I've noticed. What I'm asking is what in there needs autobind triggered >>>>> on sendmsg and why doesn't the same need affect the SOCK_STREAM case? >>>>> >>>>>> I guess some lock, perhaps the u->bindlock could be dropped before >>>>>> acquiring the next one (sb_writer), but I need to double check. >>>>> >>>>> Bad idea, IMO - do you *want* autobind being able to come through while >>>>> bind(2) is busy with mknod? >>>> >>>> >>>> Ping. This is still happening on HEAD. >>>> >>> >>> Thanks for your reminder. Mind to give the attached patch (compile only) >>> a try? I take another approach to fix this deadlock, which moves the >>> unix_mknod() out of unix->bindlock. Not sure if there is any unexpected >>> impact with this way. >> >> >> I instantly hit: >> > > Oh, sorry about it, I forgot to initialize struct path... > > Attached is the updated version, I just did a boot test, no crash at least. ;) > > Thanks! This works! I did not see the deadlock warning, nor any other related crashes. Tested-by: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: fs, net: deadlock between bind/splice on af_unix Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com> - 2017-01-17 22:30 +0100
Re: fs, net: deadlock between bind/splice on af_unix Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com> - 2017-01-18 10:30 +0100
Re: fs, net: deadlock between bind/splice on af_unix Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com> - 2017-01-20 06:00 +0100
Re: fs, net: deadlock between bind/splice on af_unix Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com> - 2017-01-21 00:00 +0100
Re: fs, net: deadlock between bind/splice on af_unix Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com> - 2017-01-23 20:10 +0100
Re: fs, net: deadlock between bind/splice on af_unix Mateusz Guzik <mguzik@redhat.com> - 2017-01-27 00:40 +0100
Re: fs, net: deadlock between bind/splice on af_unix Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com> - 2017-01-27 06:20 +0100
Re: fs, net: deadlock between bind/splice on af_unix Mateusz Guzik <mguzik@redhat.com> - 2017-01-27 07:50 +0100
csiph-web