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

Groups > linux.kernel > #1325805 > unrolled thread

Re: fs: WARNING in locks_free_lock_context()

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: fs: WARNING in locks_free_lock_context() William Dauchy <wdauchy@gmail.com> - 2016-02-03 19:30 +0100
    Re: fs: WARNING in locks_free_lock_context() Jeff Layton <jlayton@poochiereds.net> - 2016-02-03 19:30 +0100
      Re: fs: WARNING in locks_free_lock_context() William Dauchy <wdauchy@gmail.com> - 2016-02-03 19:30 +0100

#1325805 — Re: fs: WARNING in locks_free_lock_context()

Hello Jeff,

On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 2:54 PM, Jeff Layton <jlayton@poochiereds.net> wrote:
> Ooh, nice catch...and just in time for Christmas.
>
> filp_close does this after the fd has been detached from the file table
> in __close_fd:
>
>         if (likely(!(filp->f_mode & FMODE_PATH))) {
>                 dnotify_flush(filp, id);
>                 locks_remove_posix(filp, id);
>         }
>         fput(filp);
>
> ...and fcntl_setlk does this:
>
>         /*
>          * Attempt to detect a close/fcntl race and recover by
>          * releasing the lock that was just acquired.
>          */
>         /*
>          * we need that spin_lock here - it prevents reordering between
>          * update of i_flctx->flc_posix and check for it done in close().
>          * rcu_read_lock() wouldn't do.
>          */
>         spin_lock(&current->files->file_lock);
>         f = fcheck(fd);
>         spin_unlock(&current->files->file_lock);
>         if (!error && f != filp && flock.l_type != F_UNLCK) {
>                 flock.l_type = F_UNLCK;
>                 goto again;
>         }
>
> ...so in principle that should keep new locks from racing onto the list
> just after we call filp_close. Hmm...I'll see if I can reproduce and
> figure out how this could happen.

Just wondering if you had the time to figure out this warning?

Thanks,
-- 
William

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1325807

On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 19:19:37 +0100
William Dauchy <wdauchy@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello Jeff,
> 
> On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 2:54 PM, Jeff Layton <jlayton@poochiereds.net> wrote:
> > Ooh, nice catch...and just in time for Christmas.
> >
> > filp_close does this after the fd has been detached from the file table
> > in __close_fd:
> >
> >         if (likely(!(filp->f_mode & FMODE_PATH))) {
> >                 dnotify_flush(filp, id);
> >                 locks_remove_posix(filp, id);
> >         }
> >         fput(filp);
> >
> > ...and fcntl_setlk does this:
> >
> >         /*
> >          * Attempt to detect a close/fcntl race and recover by
> >          * releasing the lock that was just acquired.
> >          */
> >         /*
> >          * we need that spin_lock here - it prevents reordering between
> >          * update of i_flctx->flc_posix and check for it done in close().
> >          * rcu_read_lock() wouldn't do.
> >          */
> >         spin_lock(&current->files->file_lock);
> >         f = fcheck(fd);
> >         spin_unlock(&current->files->file_lock);
> >         if (!error && f != filp && flock.l_type != F_UNLCK) {
> >                 flock.l_type = F_UNLCK;
> >                 goto again;
> >         }
> >
> > ...so in principle that should keep new locks from racing onto the list
> > just after we call filp_close. Hmm...I'll see if I can reproduce and
> > figure out how this could happen.  
> 
> Just wondering if you had the time to figure out this warning?
> 
> Thanks,

Yes...this commit in mainline fixes it:

commit 7f3697e24dc3820b10f445a4a7d914fc356012d1
Author: Jeff Layton <jeff.layton@primarydata.com>
Date:   Thu Jan 7 16:38:10 2016 -0500

    locks: fix unlock when fcntl_setlk races with a close


...and the patch is applicable to all kernels currently in circulation.
The original bug is very old (from 2005).

-- 
Jeff Layton <jlayton@poochiereds.net>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1325809

On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 7:26 PM, Jeff Layton <jlayton@poochiereds.net> wrote:
> Yes...this commit in mainline fixes it:

Thanks Jeff, I missed it.

-- 
William

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web