Users of the locks API commonly call either posix_lock_file_wait() or
flock_lock_file_wait() depending upon the lock type. Add a new function
locks_lock_inode_wait() which will check and call the correct function for
the type of lock passed in.
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Coddington <bcodding@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jeff.layton@primarydata.com>
locks_get_lock_context() uses cmpxchg() to install i_flctx.
cmpxchg() is a release operation which is correct. But it uses
a plain load to load i_flctx. This is incorrect. Subsequent loads
from i_flctx can hoist above the load of i_flctx pointer itself
and observe uninitialized garbage there. This in turn can lead
to corruption of ctx->flc_lock and other members.
Documentation/memory-barriers.txt explicitly requires to use
a barrier in such context:
"A load-load control dependency requires a full read memory barrier".
Use smp_load_acquire() in locks_get_lock_context() and in bunch
of other functions that can proceed concurrently with
locks_get_lock_context().
The data race was found with KernelThreadSanitizer (KTSAN).
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jeff.layton@primarydata.com>
Fix kernel-doc warnings in fs/locks.c:
Warning(..//fs/locks.c:1577): No description found for parameter 'flags'
Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jeff.layton@primarydata.com>
They just call file_inode and then the corresponding *_inode_file_wait
function. Just make them static inlines instead.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jeff.layton@primarydata.com>
Allow callers to pass in an inode instead of a filp.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jeff.layton@primarydata.com>
Reviewed-by: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
Tested-by: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
...and rename it to better describe how it works.
In order to fix a use-after-free in NFS, we need to be able to remove
locks from an inode after the filp associated with them may have already
been freed. flock_lock_file already only dereferences the filp to get to
the inode, so just change it so the callers do that.
All of the callers already pass in a lock request that has the fl_file
set properly, so we don't need to pass it in individually. With that
change it now only dereferences the filp to get to the inode, so just
push that out to the callers.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jeff.layton@primarydata.com>
Reviewed-by: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
Tested-by: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
Let's show locks which are associated with a file descriptor in
its fdinfo file.
Currently we don't have a reliable way to determine who holds a lock. We
can find some information in /proc/locks, but PID which is reported there
can be wrong. For example, a process takes a lock, then forks a child and
dies. In this case /proc/locks contains the parent pid, which can be
reused by another process.
$ cat /proc/locks
...
6: FLOCK ADVISORY WRITE 324 00:13:13431 0 EOF
...
$ ps -C rpcbind
PID TTY TIME CMD
332 ? 00:00:00 rpcbind
$ cat /proc/332/fdinfo/4
pos: 0
flags: 0100000
mnt_id: 22
lock: 1: FLOCK ADVISORY WRITE 324 00:13:13431 0 EOF
$ ls -l /proc/332/fd/4
lr-x------ 1 root root 64 Mar 5 14:43 /proc/332/fd/4 -> /run/rpcbind.lock
$ ls -l /proc/324/fd/
total 0
lrwx------ 1 root root 64 Feb 27 14:50 0 -> /dev/pts/0
lrwx------ 1 root root 64 Feb 27 14:50 1 -> /dev/pts/0
lrwx------ 1 root root 64 Feb 27 14:49 2 -> /dev/pts/0
You can see that the process with the 324 pid doesn't hold the lock.
This information is required for proper dumping and restoring file
locks.
Signed-off-by: Andrey Vagin <avagin@openvz.org>
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Acked-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@poochiereds.net>
Acked-by: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
Acked-by: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@openvz.org>
Cc: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@parallels.com>
Cc: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
During the v3.20/v4.0 cycle, I had originally had the code manage the
inode->i_flctx pointer using a compare-and-swap operation instead of the
i_lock.
Sasha Levin though hit a problem while testing with trinity that made me
believe that that wasn't safe. At the time, changing the code to protect
the i_flctx pointer seemed to fix the issue, but I now think that was
just coincidence.
The issue was likely the same race that Kirill Shutemov hit while
testing the pre-rc1 v4.0 kernel and that Linus spotted. Due to the way
that the spinlock was dropped in the middle of flock_lock_file, you
could end up with multiple flock locks for the same struct file on the
inode.
Reinstate the use of a CAS operation to assign this pointer since it's
likely to be more efficient and gets the i_lock completely out of the
file locking business.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jeff.layton@primarydata.com>
As Bruce points out, there's no compelling reason to change /proc/locks
output at this point. If we did want to do this, then we'd almost
certainly want to introduce a new file to display this info (maybe via
debugfs?).
Let's remove the dead WE_CAN_BREAK_LSLK_NOW ifdef here and just plan to
stay with the legacy format.
Reported-by: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jeff.layton@primarydata.com>
The current prototypes for these operations are somewhat awkward as they
deal with fl_owners but take struct file_lock arguments. In the future,
we'll want to be able to take references without necessarily dealing
with a struct file_lock.
Change them to take fl_owner_t arguments instead and have the callers
deal with assigning the values to the file_lock structs.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@primarydata.com>
In the event that we get an F_UNLCK request on an inode that has no lock
context, there is no reason to allocate one. Change
locks_get_lock_context to take a "type" pointer and avoid allocating a
new context if it's F_UNLCK.
Then, fix the callers to return appropriately if that function returns
NULL.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@primarydata.com>
Annonate insert, remove and iterate function that we need
blocked_lock_lock held.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Wagner <daniel.wagner@bmw-carit.de>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jeff.layton@primarydata.com>
We know that the locks being passed into this function are of the
correct type, now that they live on their own lists.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jeff.layton@primarydata.com>
Since following change
commit bd61e0a9c8
Author: Jeff Layton <jlayton@primarydata.com>
Date: Fri Jan 16 15:05:55 2015 -0500
locks: convert posix locks to file_lock_context
all Posix locks are kept on their a separate list, so the test is
redudant.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Wagner <daniel.wagner@bmw-carit.de>
Cc: Jeff Layton <jlayton@primarydata.com>
Cc: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jeff.layton@primarydata.com>
locks_delete_lock_ctx() is called inside the loop, so we
should use list_for_each_entry_safe.
Fixes: 8634b51f6c (locks: convert lease handling to file_lock_context)
Signed-off-by: "Yan, Zheng" <zyan@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jeff.layton@primarydata.com>
It's possible that "fl" won't point at a valid lock at this point, so
use "victim" instead which is either a valid lock or NULL.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jeff.layton@primarydata.com>
Commit 8634b51f6c (locks: convert lease handling to file_lock_context)
introduced a regression in the handling of lease upgrade/downgrades.
In the event that we already have a lease on a file and are going to
either upgrade or downgrade it, we skip doing any list insertion or
deletion and simply re-call lm_setup on the existing lease.
As of commit 8634b51f6c however, we end up calling lm_setup on the
lease that was passed in, instead of on the existing lease. This causes
us to leak the fasync_struct that was allocated in the event that there
was not already an existing one (as it always appeared that there
wasn't one).
Fixes: 8634b51f6c (locks: convert lease handling to file_lock_context)
Reported-and-Tested-by: Daniel Wagner <daniel.wagner@bmw-carit.de>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jeff.layton@primarydata.com>
In the case where we're splitting a lock in two, the current code
the new "left" lock in the incorrect spot. It's inserted just
before "right" when it should instead be inserted just before the
new lock.
When we add a new lock, set "fl" to that value so that we can
add "left" before it.
Reported-by: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jeff.layton@primarydata.com>
As Linus pointed out:
Say we have an existing flock, and now do a new one that conflicts. I
see what looks like three separate bugs.
- We go through the first loop, find a lock of another type, and
delete it in preparation for replacing it
- we *drop* the lock context spinlock.
- BUG #1? So now there is no lock at all, and somebody can come in
and see that unlocked state. Is that really valid?
- another thread comes in while the first thread dropped the lock
context lock, and wants to add its own lock. It doesn't see the
deleted or pending locks, so it just adds it
- the first thread gets the context spinlock again, and adds the lock
that replaced the original
- BUG #2? So now there are *two* locks on the thing, and the next
time you do an unlock (or when you close the file), it will only
remove/replace the first one.
...remove the "drop the spinlock" code in the middle of this function as
it has always been suspicious. This should eliminate the potential race
that can leave two locks for the same struct file on the list.
He also pointed out another thing as a bug -- namely that you
flock_lock_file removes the lock from the list unconditionally when
doing a lock upgrade, without knowing whether it'll be able to set the
new lock. Bruce pointed out that this is expected behavior and may help
prevent certain deadlock situations.
We may want to revisit that at some point, but it's probably best that
we do so in the context of a different patchset.
Reported-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jeff.layton@primarydata.com>
This reverts commit 9bd0f45b70.
Linus rightly pointed out that I failed to initialize the counters
when adding them, so they don't work as expected. Just revert this
patch for now.
Reported-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jeff.layton@primarydata.com>
This (ab-)uses the file locking code to allow filesystems to recall
outstanding pNFS layouts on a file. This new lease type is similar but
not quite the same as FL_DELEG. A FL_LAYOUT lease can always be granted,
an a per-filesystem lock (XFS iolock for the initial implementation)
ensures not FL_LAYOUT leases granted when we would need to recall them.
Also included are changes that allow multiple outstanding read
leases of different types on the same file as long as they have a
differnt owner. This wasn't a problem until now as nfsd never set
FL_LEASE leases, and no one else used FL_DELEG leases, but given that
nfsd will also issues FL_LAYOUT leases we will have to handle it now.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Just like for other lock types we should allow different owners to have
a read lease on a file. Currently this can't happen, but with the addition
of pNFS layout leases we'll need this feature.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
We have each of the locks_remove_* variants doing this individually.
Have the caller do it instead, and have locks_remove_flock and
locks_remove_lease just assume that it's a valid pointer.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@primarydata.com>
This makes things a bit more efficient in the cifs and ceph lock
pushing code.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@primarydata.com>
Acked-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Now that we use standard list_heads for tracking leases, we can have
lm_change take a pointer to the lease to be modified instead of a
double pointer.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@primarydata.com>
Acked-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
We can now add a dedicated spinlock without expanding struct inode.
Change to using that to protect the various i_flctx lists.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@primarydata.com>
Acked-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
The current scheme of using the i_flock list is really difficult to
manage. There is also a legitimate desire for a per-inode spinlock to
manage these lists that isn't the i_lock.
Start conversion to a new scheme to eventually replace the old i_flock
list with a new "file_lock_context" object.
We start by adding a new i_flctx to struct inode. For now, it lives in
parallel with i_flock list, but will eventually replace it. The idea is
to allocate a structure to sit in that pointer and act as a locus for
all things file locking.
We allocate a file_lock_context for an inode when the first lock is
added to it, and it's only freed when the inode is freed. We use the
i_lock to protect the assignment, but afterward it should mostly be
accessed locklessly.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@primarydata.com>
Acked-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
...instead of open-coding it and removing flock locks directly. This
helps consolidate the flock lock removal logic into a single spot.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@primarydata.com>
...that we can use to queue file_locks to per-ctx list_heads. Go ahead
and convert locks_delete_lock and locks_dispose_list to use it instead
of the fl_block list.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@primarydata.com>
Acked-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
commit 0efaa7e82f
locks: generic_delete_lease doesn't need a file_lock at all
moves the call to fl->fl_lmops->lm_change() to a place in the
code where fl might be a non-lease lock.
When that happens, fl_lmops is NULL and an Oops ensures.
So add an extra test to restore correct functioning.
Reported-by: Linda Walsh <suse@tlinx.org>
Link: https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=912569
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org (v3.18)
Fixes: 0efaa7e82f
Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@primarydata.com>
Like flock locks, leases are owned by the file description. Now that the
i_have_this_lease check in __break_lease is gone, we don't actually use
the fl_owner for leases for anything. So, it's now safe to set this more
appropriately to the same value as the fl_file.
While we're at it, fix up the comments over the fl_owner_t definition
since they're rather out of date.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@primarydata.com>
Christoph suggests:
"Add a return value to lm_break so that the lock manager can tell the
core code "you can delete this lease right now". That gets rid of
the games with the timeout which require all kinds of race avoidance
code in the users."
Do that here and have the nfsd lease break routine use it when it detects
that there was a race between setting up the lease and it being broken.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@primarydata.com>
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Eliminate an unneeded "flock" variable. We can use "fl" as a loop cursor
everywhere. Add a any_leases_conflict helper function as well to
consolidate a bit of code.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@primarydata.com>
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
I think that the intent of this code was to ensure that a process won't
deadlock if it has one fd open with a lease on it and then breaks that
lease by opening another fd. In that case it'll treat the __break_lease
call as if it were non-blocking.
This seems wrong -- the process could (for instance) be multithreaded
and managing different fds via different threads. I also don't see any
mention of this limitation in the (somewhat sketchy) documentation.
Remove the check and the non-blocking behavior when i_have_this_lease
is true.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@primarydata.com>
There was only one place where we still could free a file_lock while
holding the i_lock -- lease_modify. Add a new list_head argument to the
lm_change operation, pass in a private list when calling it, and fix
those callers to dispose of the list once the lock has been dropped.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@primarydata.com>
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Now that we have a saner internal API for managing leases, we no longer
need to mandate that the inode->i_lock be held over most of the lease
code. Push it down into generic_add_lease and generic_delete_lease.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@primarydata.com>
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
...and move the fasync setup into it for fcntl lease calls. At the same
time, change the semantics of how the file_lock double-pointer is
handled. Up until now, on a successful lease return you got a pointer to
the lock on the list. This is bad, since that pointer can no longer be
relied on as valid once the inode->i_lock has been released.
Change the code to instead just zero out the pointer if the lease we
passed in ended up being used. Then the callers can just check to see
if it's NULL after the call and free it if it isn't.
The priv argument has the same semantics. The lm_setup function can
zero the pointer out to signal to the caller that it should not be
freed after the function returns.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@primarydata.com>
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
In later patches, we're going to add a new lock_manager_operation to
finish setting up the lease while still holding the i_lock. To do
this, we'll need to pass a little bit of info in the fcntl setlease
case (primarily an fasync structure). Plumb the extra pointer into
there in advance of that.
We declare this pointer as a void ** to make it clear that this is
private info, and that the caller isn't required to set this unless
the lm_setup specifically requires it.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@primarydata.com>
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Some of the latter paragraphs seem ambiguous and just plain wrong.
In particular the break_lease comment makes no sense. We call
break_lease (and break_deleg) from all sorts of vfs-layer functions,
so there is clearly such a method.
Also get rid of some of the other comments about what's needed for
a full implementation.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@primarydata.com>
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Ensure that it's OK to pass in a NULL file_lock double pointer on
a F_UNLCK request and convert the vfs_setlease F_UNLCK callers to
do just that.
Finally, turn the BUG_ON in generic_setlease into a WARN_ON_ONCE
with an error return. That's a problem we can handle without
crashing the box if it occurs.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@primarydata.com>
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
lease_get_mtime is called without the i_lock held, so there's no
guarantee about the stability of the list. Between the time when we
assign "flock" and then dereference it to check whether it's a lease
and for write, the lease could be freed.
Ensure that that doesn't occur by taking the i_lock before trying
to check the lease.
Cc: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@fieldses.org>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@primarydata.com>
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
security_file_set_fowner always returns 0, so make it f_setown and
__f_setown void return functions and fix up the error handling in the
callers.
Cc: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@primarydata.com>
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Commit d5b9026a67 ([PATCH] knfsd: locks: flag NFSv4-owned locks) using
fl_lmops field in file_lock for checking nfsd4 lockowner.
But, commit 1a747ee0cc (locks: don't call ->copy_lock methods on return
of conflicting locks) causes the fl_lmops of conflock always be NULL.
Also, commit 0996905f93 (lockd: posix_test_lock() should not call
locks_copy_lock()) caused the fl_lmops of conflock always be NULL too.
Make sure copy the private information by fl_copy_lock() in struct
file_lock_operations, merge __locks_copy_lock() to fl_copy_lock().
Jeff advice, "Set fl_lmops on conflocks, but don't set fl_ops.
fl_ops are superfluous, since they are callbacks into the filesystem.
There should be no need to bother the filesystem at all with info
in a conflock. But, lock _ownership_ matters for conflocks and that's
indicated by the fl_lmops. So you really do want to copy the fl_lmops
for conflocks I think."
v5: add missing calling of locks_release_private() in nlmsvc_testlock()
v4: only copy fl_lmops for conflock, don't copy fl_ops
Signed-off-by: Kinglong Mee <kinglongmee@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@primarydata.com>
NFSD or other lockmanager may increase the owner's reference,
so adds two new options for copying and releasing owner.
v5: change order from 2/6 to 3/6
v4: rename lm_copy_owner/lm_release_owner to lm_get_owner/lm_put_owner
Reviewed-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@primarydata.com>
Signed-off-by: Kinglong Mee <kinglongmee@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@primarydata.com>
Jeff advice, " Right now __locks_copy_lock is only used to copy
conflocks. It would be good to rename that to something more
distinct (i.e.locks_copy_conflock), to make it clear that we're
generating a conflock there."
v5: change order from 3/6 to 2/6
v4: new patch only renaming function name
Signed-off-by: Kinglong Mee <kinglongmee@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@primarydata.com>
The argument to locks_unlink_lock can't be just any pointer to a
pointer. It must be a pointer to the fl_next field in the previous
lock in the list.
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v3.15+
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@primarydata.com>
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
There's no need to call locks_free_lock here while still holding the
i_lock. Defer that until the lock has been dropped.
Acked-by: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@fieldses.org>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@primarydata.com>
In commit 72f98e7255 (locks: turn lock_flocks into a spinlock), we
moved from using the BKL to a global spinlock. With this change, we lost
the ability to block in the fl_release_private operation.
This is problematic for NFS (and probably some other filesystems as
well). Add a new list_head argument to locks_delete_lock. If that
argument is non-NULL, then queue any locks that we want to free to the
list instead of freeing them.
Then, add a new locks_dispose_list function that will walk such a list
and call locks_free_lock on them after the i_lock has been dropped.
Finally, change all of the callers of locks_delete_lock to pass in a
list_head, except for lease_modify. That function can be called long
after the i_lock has been acquired. Deferring the freeing of a lease
after unlocking it in that function is non-trivial until we overhaul
some of the spinlocking in the lease code.
Currently though, no filesystem that sets fl_release_private supports
leases, so this is not currently a problem. We'll eventually want to
make the same change in the lease code, but it needs a lot more work
before we can reasonably do so.
Acked-by: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@fieldses.org>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@primarydata.com>
Currently in the case where a new file lock completely replaces the old
one, we end up overwriting the existing lock with the new info. This
means that we have to call fl_release_private inside i_lock. Change the
code to instead copy the info to new_fl, insert that lock into the
correct spot and then delete the old lock. In a later patch, we'll defer
the freeing of the old lock until after the i_lock has been dropped.
Acked-by: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@fieldses.org>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@primarydata.com>
All callers of locks_copy_lock pass in a brand new file_lock struct, so
there's no need to call locks_release_private on it. Replace that with
a warning that fires in the event that we receive a target lock that
doesn't look like it's properly initialized.
Acked-by: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@fieldses.org>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@primarydata.com>
Now that they are a distinct lease type, show them as such.
Cc: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@fieldses.org>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@primarydata.com>
This fixes a regression due to commit 130d1f956a (locks: ensure that
fl_owner is always initialized properly in flock and lease codepaths). I
had mistakenly thought that the fl_owner wasn't used in the lease code,
but I missed the place in __break_lease that does use it.
The i_have_this_lease check in generic_add_lease uses it. While I'm not
sure that check is terribly helpful [1], reset it back to using
current->files in order to ensure that there's no behavior change here.
[1]: leases are owned by the file description. It's possible that this
is a threaded program, and the lease breaker and the task that
would handle the signal are different, even if they have the same
file table. So, there is the potential for false positives with
this check.
Fixes: 130d1f956a (locks: ensure that fl_owner is always initialized properly in flock and lease codepaths)
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@primarydata.com>
v2: add a __break_lease tracepoint for non-blocking case
Recently, I needed these to help track down a softlockup when recalling a
delegation, but they might be helpful in other situations as well.
Cc: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@poochiereds.net>
Replace seq_printf where possible
Cc: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Fabian Frederick <fabf@skynet.be>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@poochiereds.net>
Currently, the fl_owner isn't set for flock locks. Some filesystems use
byte-range locks to simulate flock locks and there is a common idiom in
those that does:
fl->fl_owner = (fl_owner_t)filp;
fl->fl_start = 0;
fl->fl_end = OFFSET_MAX;
Since flock locks are generally "owned" by the open file description,
move this into the common flock lock setup code. The fl_start and fl_end
fields are already set appropriately, so remove the unneeded setting of
that in flock ops in those filesystems as well.
Finally, the lease code also sets the fl_owner as if they were owned by
the process and not the open file description. This is incorrect as
leases have the same ownership semantics as flock locks. Set them the
same way. The lease code doesn't actually use the fl_owner value for
anything, so this is more for consistency's sake than a bugfix.
Reported-by: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@primarydata.com>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@poochiereds.net>
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> (Staging portion)
Acked-by: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@fieldses.org>
v2: replace missing break in switch statement (as pointed out by Dave
Jones)
commit bce7560d49 (locks: consolidate checks for compatible
filp->f_mode values in setlk handlers) introduced a regression in the
F_GETLK handler.
flock64_to_posix_lock is a shared codepath between F_GETLK and F_SETLK,
but the f_mode checks should only be applicable to the F_SETLK codepaths
according to POSIX.
Instead of just reverting the patch, add a new function to do this
checking and have the F_SETLK handlers call it.
Cc: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>
Reported-and-Tested-by: Reuben Farrelly <reuben@reub.net>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@poochiereds.net>
File-private locks have been re-christened as "open file description"
locks. Finish the symbol name cleanup in the internal implementation.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
File-private locks have been merged into Linux for v3.15, and *now*
people are commenting that the name and macro definitions for the new
file-private locks suck.
...and I can't even disagree. The names and command macros do suck.
We're going to have to live with these for a long time, so it's
important that we be happy with the names before we're stuck with them.
The consensus on the lists so far is that they should be rechristened as
"open file description locks".
The name isn't a big deal for the kernel, but the command macros are not
visually distinct enough from the traditional POSIX lock macros. The
glibc and documentation folks are recommending that we change them to
look like F_OFD_{GETLK|SETLK|SETLKW}. That lessens the chance that a
programmer will typo one of the commands wrong, and also makes it easier
to spot this difference when reading code.
This patch makes the following changes that I think are necessary before
v3.15 ships:
1) rename the command macros to their new names. These end up in the uapi
headers and so are part of the external-facing API. It turns out that
glibc doesn't actually use the fcntl.h uapi header, but it's hard to
be sure that something else won't. Changing it now is safest.
2) make the the /proc/locks output display these as type "OFDLCK"
Cc: Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: Carlos O'Donell <carlos@redhat.com>
Cc: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Cc: Frank Filz <ffilzlnx@mindspring.com>
Cc: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
A fl->fl_break_time of 0 has a special meaning to the lease break code
that basically means "never break the lease". knfsd uses this to ensure
that leases don't disappear out from under it.
Unfortunately, the code in __break_lease can end up passing this value
to wait_event_interruptible as a timeout, which prevents it from going
to sleep at all. This makes __break_lease to spin in a tight loop and
causes soft lockups.
Fix this by ensuring that we pass a minimum value of 1 as a timeout
instead.
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@fieldses.org>
Reported-by: Terry Barnaby <terry1@beam.ltd.uk>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
Allow locks_mandatory_area() to handle file-private locks correctly.
If there is a file-private lock set on an open file and we're doing I/O
via the same, then that should not cause anything to block.
Handle this by first doing a non-blocking FL_ACCESS check for a
file-private lock, and then fall back to checking for a classic POSIX
lock (and possibly blocking).
Note that this approach is subject to the same races that have always
plagued mandatory locking on Linux.
Reported-by: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@primarydata.com>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
As Trond pointed out, you can currently deadlock yourself by setting a
file-private lock on a file that requires mandatory locking and then
trying to do I/O on it.
Avoid this problem by plumbing some knowledge of file-private locks into
the mandatory locking code. In order to do this, we must pass down
information about the struct file that's being used to
locks_verify_locked.
Reported-by: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@primarydata.com>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
Acked-by: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@redhat.com>
Neil Brown suggested potentially overloading the l_pid value as a "lock
context" field for file-private locks. While I don't think we will
probably want to do that here, it's probably a good idea to ensure that
in the future we could extend this API without breaking existing
callers.
Typically the l_pid value is ignored for incoming struct flock
arguments, serving mainly as a place to return the pid of the owner if
there is a conflicting lock. For file-private locks, require that it
currently be set to 0 and return EINVAL if it isn't. If we eventually
want to make a non-zero l_pid mean something, then this will help ensure
that we don't break legacy programs that are using file-private locks.
Cc: Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
Due to some unfortunate history, POSIX locks have very strange and
unhelpful semantics. The thing that usually catches people by surprise
is that they are dropped whenever the process closes any file descriptor
associated with the inode.
This is extremely problematic for people developing file servers that
need to implement byte-range locks. Developers often need a "lock
management" facility to ensure that file descriptors are not closed
until all of the locks associated with the inode are finished.
Additionally, "classic" POSIX locks are owned by the process. Locks
taken between threads within the same process won't conflict with one
another, which renders them useless for synchronization between threads.
This patchset adds a new type of lock that attempts to address these
issues. These locks conflict with classic POSIX read/write locks, but
have semantics that are more like BSD locks with respect to inheritance
and behavior on close.
This is implemented primarily by changing how fl_owner field is set for
these locks. Instead of having them owned by the files_struct of the
process, they are instead owned by the filp on which they were acquired.
Thus, they are inherited across fork() and are only released when the
last reference to a filp is put.
These new semantics prevent them from being merged with classic POSIX
locks, even if they are acquired by the same process. These locks will
also conflict with classic POSIX locks even if they are acquired by
the same process or on the same file descriptor.
The new locks are managed using a new set of cmd values to the fcntl()
syscall. The initial implementation of this converts these values to
"classic" cmd values at a fairly high level, and the details are not
exposed to the underlying filesystem. We may eventually want to push
this handing out to the lower filesystem code but for now I don't
see any need for it.
Also, note that with this implementation the new cmd values are only
available via fcntl64() on 32-bit arches. There's little need to
add support for legacy apps on a new interface like this.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
It's not really feasible to do deadlock detection with FL_FILE_PVT
locks since they aren't owned by a single task, per-se. Deadlock
detection also tends to be rather expensive so just skip it for
these sorts of locks.
Also, add a FIXME comment about adding more limited deadlock detection
that just applies to ro -> rw upgrades, per Andy's request.
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
Once we introduce file private locks, we'll need to know what cmd value
was used, as that affects the ownership and whether a conflict would
arise.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
FL_FILE_PVT locks are no longer tied to a particular pid, and are
instead inheritable by child processes. Report a l_pid of '-1' for
these sorts of locks since the pid is somewhat meaningless for them.
This precedent comes from FreeBSD. There, POSIX and flock() locks can
conflict with one another. If fcntl(F_GETLK, ...) returns a lock set
with flock() then the l_pid member cannot be a process ID because the
lock is not held by a process as such.
Acked-by: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@fieldses.org>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
In a later patch, we'll be adding a new type of lock that's owned by
the struct file instead of the files_struct. Those sorts of locks
will be flagged with a new FL_FILE_PVT flag.
Report these types of locks as "FLPVT" in /proc/locks to distinguish
them from "classic" POSIX locks.
Acked-by: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@fieldses.org>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
This function currently removes leases in addition to flock locks and in
a later patch we'll have it deal with file-private locks too. Rename it
to locks_remove_file to indicate that it removes locks that are
associated with a particular struct file, and not just flock locks.
Acked-by: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@fieldses.org>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
Move this check into flock64_to_posix_lock instead of duplicating it in
two places. This also fixes a minor wart in the code where we continue
referring to the struct flock after converting it to struct file_lock.
Acked-by: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@fieldses.org>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
In the 32-bit case fcntl assigns the 64-bit f_pos and i_size to a 32-bit
off_t.
The existing range checks also seem to depend on signed arithmetic
wrapping when it overflows. In practice maybe that works, but we can be
more careful. That also allows us to make a more reliable distinction
between -EINVAL and -EOVERFLOW.
Note that in the 32-bit case SEEK_CUR or SEEK_END might allow the caller
to set a lock with starting point no longer representable as a 32-bit
value. We could return -EOVERFLOW in such cases, but the locks code is
capable of handling such ranges, so we choose to be lenient here. The
only problem is that subsequent GETLK calls on such a lock will fail
with EOVERFLOW.
While we're here, do some cleanup including consolidating code for the
flock and flock64 cases.
Signed-off-by: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@fieldses.org>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
A leftover lock on the list is surely a sign of a problem of some sort,
but it's not necessarily a reason to panic the box. Instead, just log a
warning with some info about the lock, and then delete it like we would
any other lock.
In the event that the filesystem declares a ->lock f_op, we may end up
leaking something, but that's generally preferable to an immediate
panic.
Acked-by: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@fieldses.org>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
It's best to let the compiler decide that.
Acked-by: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@fieldses.org>
Reported-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
As Al Viro points out, there is an unlikely, but possible race between
opening a file and setting a lease on it. generic_add_lease is done with
the i_lock held, but the inode->i_flock check in break_lease is
lockless. It's possible for another task doing an open to do the entire
pathwalk and call break_lease between the point where generic_add_lease
checks for a conflicting open and adds the lease to the list. If this
occurs, we can end up with a lease set on the file with a conflicting
open.
To guard against that, check again for a conflicting open after adding
the lease to the i_flock list. If the above race occurs, then we can
simply unwind the lease setting and return -EAGAIN.
Because we take dentry references and acquire write access on the file
before calling break_lease, we know that if the i_flock list is empty
when the open caller goes to check it then the necessary refcounts have
already been incremented. Thus the additional check for a conflicting
open will see that there is one and the setlease call will fail.
Cc: Bruce Fields <bfields@fieldses.org>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reported-by: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@fieldses.org>
We should unlock here before returning.
Fixes: df4e8d2c1d ('locks: implement delegations')
Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Implement NFSv4 delegations at the vfs level using the new FL_DELEG lock
type.
Note nfsd is the only delegation user and is only using read
delegations. Warn on any attempt to set a write delegation for now.
We'll come back to that case later.
Acked-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
For now FL_DELEG is just a synonym for FL_LEASE. So this patch doesn't
change behavior.
Next we'll modify break_lease to treat FL_DELEG leases differently, to
account for the fact that NFSv4 delegations should be broken in more
situations than Windows oplocks.
Acked-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
The file_lock_list is only used for /proc/locks. The vastly common case
is for locks to be put onto the list and come off again, without ever
being traversed.
Help optimize for this use-case by moving to percpu hlist_head-s. At the
same time, we can make the locking less contentious by moving to an
lglock. When iterating over the lists for /proc/locks, we must take the
global lock and then iterate over each CPU's list in turn.
This change necessitates a new fl_link_cpu field to keep track of which
CPU the entry is on. On x86_64 at least, this field is placed within an
existing hole in the struct to avoid growing the size.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
Acked-by: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@fieldses.org>
Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
There's no reason we have to protect the blocked_hash and file_lock_list
with the same spinlock. With the tests I have, breaking it in two gives
a barely measurable performance benefit, but it seems reasonable to make
this locking as granular as possible.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Currently, the hashing that the locking code uses to add these values
to the blocked_hash is simply calculated using fl_owner field. That's
valid in most cases except for server-side lockd, which validates the
owner of a lock based on fl_owner and fl_pid.
In the case where you have a small number of NFS clients doing a lot
of locking between different processes, you could end up with all
the blocked requests sitting in a very small number of hash buckets.
Add a new lm_owner_key operation to the lock_manager_operations that
will generate an unsigned long to use as the key in the hashtable.
That function is only implemented for server-side lockd, and simply
XORs the fl_owner and fl_pid.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
Acked-by: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@fieldses.org>
Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Break up the blocked_list into a hashtable, using the fl_owner as a key.
This speeds up searching the hash chains, which is especially significant
for deadlock detection.
Note that the initial implementation assumes that hashing on fl_owner is
sufficient. In most cases it should be, with the notable exception being
server-side lockd, which compares ownership using a tuple of the
nlm_host and the pid sent in the lock request. So, this may degrade to a
single hash bucket when you only have a single NFS client. That will be
addressed in a later patch.
The careful observer may note that this patch leaves the file_lock_list
alone. There's much less of a case for turning the file_lock_list into a
hashtable. The only user of that list is the code that generates
/proc/locks, and it always walks the entire list.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
Acked-by: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@fieldses.org>
Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Testing has shown that iterating over the blocked_list for deadlock
detection turns out to be a bottleneck. In order to alleviate that,
begin the process of turning it into a hashtable. We start by turning
the fl_link into a hlist_node and the global lists into hlists. A later
patch will do the conversion of the blocked_list to a hashtable.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
Acked-by: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@fieldses.org>
Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Since we always hold the i_lock when inserting a new waiter onto the
fl_block list, we can avoid taking the global lock at all if we find
that it's empty when we go to wake up blocked waiters.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Having a global lock that protects all of this code is a clear
scalability problem. Instead of doing that, move most of the code to be
protected by the i_lock instead. The exceptions are the global lists
that the ->fl_link sits on, and the ->fl_block list.
->fl_link is what connects these structures to the
global lists, so we must ensure that we hold those locks when iterating
over or updating these lists.
Furthermore, sound deadlock detection requires that we hold the
blocked_list state steady while checking for loops. We also must ensure
that the search and update to the list are atomic.
For the checking and insertion side of the blocked_list, push the
acquisition of the global lock into __posix_lock_file and ensure that
checking and update of the blocked_list is done without dropping the
lock in between.
On the removal side, when waking up blocked lock waiters, take the
global lock before walking the blocked list and dequeue the waiters from
the global list prior to removal from the fl_block list.
With this, deadlock detection should be race free while we minimize
excessive file_lock_lock thrashing.
Finally, in order to avoid a lock inversion problem when handling
/proc/locks output we must ensure that manipulations of the fl_block
list are also protected by the file_lock_lock.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Move the fl_link list handling routines into a separate set of helpers.
Also ensure that locks and requests are always put on global lists
last (after fully initializing them) and are taken off before unintializing
them.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Benjamin Coddington