Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1741872

Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] fs: detect that the i_rwsem has already been taken exclusively

Show all headers | View raw

On Thu, 2017-09-28 at 16:39 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 08:39:33AM -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> >> Don't attempt to take the i_rwsem, if it has already been taken
> >> exclusively.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by:  Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> >
> > That's bloody awful.
> >
> > The locking in filesystem IO paths is already complex enough without
> > adding a new IO path semantic that says "caller has already locked
> > the i_rwsem in some order and some dependencies that we have no idea
> > about".
> 
> I do have to admit that I never got a satisfactory answer on why IMA
> doesn't just use its own private per-inode lock for this all.
> 
> It isn't using the i_rwsem for file consistency reasons anyway, so it
> seems to be purely about serializing the actual signature generation
> with the xattr writing, but since IMA does those both, why isn't IMA
> just using its own lock (not the filesystem lock) to do that?

Originally IMA did define it's own lock, prior to IMA-appraisal.  IMA-
appraisal introduced writing the file hash as an xattr, which required
taking the i_mutex.  process_measurement() and ima_file_free() took
the iint->mutex first and then the i_mutex, while setxattr, chmod and
chown took the locks in reverse order.  To resolve the potential
deadlock, the iint->mutex was eliminated.

Mimi

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

[RFC PATCH 0/3] define new read_iter file operation rwf flag Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2017-09-28 14:50 +0200
  [RFC PATCH 3/3] fs: detect that the i_rwsem has already been taken exclusively Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2017-09-28 14:50 +0200
    Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] fs: detect that the i_rwsem has already been  taken exclusively Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> - 2017-09-29 00:10 +0200
      Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] fs: detect that the i_rwsem has already been  taken exclusively Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> - 2017-09-29 01:40 +0200
        Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] fs: detect that the i_rwsem has already been  taken exclusively Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2017-09-29 02:20 +0200
          Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] fs: detect that the i_rwsem has already been  taken exclusively Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> - 2017-09-29 02:40 +0200
            Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] fs: detect that the i_rwsem has already been  taken exclusively Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2017-09-29 04:00 +0200
              Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] fs: detect that the i_rwsem has already been  taken exclusively Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> - 2017-09-29 05:30 +0200
                Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] fs: detect that the i_rwsem has already been taken exclusively ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) - 2017-10-01 03:40 +0200
                Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] fs: detect that the i_rwsem has already been  taken exclusively Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2017-10-01 14:10 +0200
                Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] fs: detect that the i_rwsem has already been  taken exclusively Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> - 2017-10-01 20:50 +0200
                Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] fs: detect that the i_rwsem has already been  taken exclusively Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> - 2017-10-02 00:40 +0200
                Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] fs: detect that the i_rwsem has already been  taken exclusively Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> - 2017-10-02 01:20 +0200
                Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] fs: detect that the i_rwsem has already been  taken exclusively Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> - 2017-10-02 06:00 +0200
                Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] fs: detect that the i_rwsem has already been  taken exclusively Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2017-10-02 01:50 +0200
                Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] fs: detect that the i_rwsem has already been taken exclusively ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) - 2017-10-02 05:30 +0200
                Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] fs: detect that the i_rwsem has already been  taken exclusively Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2017-10-02 14:30 +0200
                Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] fs: detect that the i_rwsem has already been  taken exclusively Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> - 2017-10-02 06:40 +0200
                Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] fs: detect that the i_rwsem has already been  taken exclusively Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2017-10-02 14:20 +0200
                Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] fs: detect that the i_rwsem has already been  taken exclusively Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com> - 2017-10-02 14:50 +0200
                Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] fs: detect that the i_rwsem has already been taken exclusively ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) - 2017-10-02 00:10 +0200
                Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] fs: detect that the i_rwsem has already been  taken exclusively Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> - 2017-10-02 00:30 +0200
                Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] fs: detect that the i_rwsem has already been  taken exclusively Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2017-10-02 02:00 +0200
  [RFC PATCH 1/3] fs: define new read_iter rwf flag Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2017-09-28 14:50 +0200
    Re: [RFC PATCH 1/3] fs: define new read_iter rwf flag Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> - 2017-09-28 16:00 +0200
      Re: [RFC PATCH 1/3] fs: define new read_iter rwf flag Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2017-09-28 16:40 +0200
      Re: [RFC PATCH 1/3] fs: define new read_iter rwf flag Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> - 2017-09-28 18:00 +0200

csiph-web