VFS: close race between getcwd() and d_move()

[ Upstream commit 61647823aa920e395afcce4b57c32afb51456cab ]

d_move() will call __d_drop() and then __d_rehash()
on the dentry being moved.  This creates a small window
when the dentry appears to be unhashed.  Many tests
of d_unhashed() are made under ->d_lock and so are safe
from racing with this window, but some aren't.
In particular, getcwd() calls d_unlinked() (which calls
d_unhashed()) without d_lock protection, so it can race.

This races has been seen in practice with lustre, which uses d_move() as
part of name lookup.  See:
   https://jira.hpdd.intel.com/browse/LU-9735
It could race with a regular rename(), and result in ENOENT instead
of either the 'before' or 'after' name.

The race can be demonstrated with a simple program which
has two threads, one renaming a directory back and forth
while another calls getcwd() within that directory: it should never
fail, but does.  See:
  https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9455345/

We could fix this race by taking d_lock and rechecking when
d_unhashed() reports true.  Alternately when can remove the window,
which is the approach this patch takes.

___d_drop() is introduce which does *not* clear d_hash.pprev
so the dentry still appears to be hashed.  __d_drop() calls
___d_drop(), then clears d_hash.pprev.
__d_move() now uses ___d_drop() and only clears d_hash.pprev
when not rehashing.

Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <alexander.levin@microsoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>

diff --git a/fs/dcache.c b/fs/dcache.c
index a141778..c28b9c9 100644 (file)
--- a/fs/dcache.c
+++ b/fs/dcache.c
@@ -468,9 +468,11 @@ static void dentry_lru_add(struct dentry *dentry)
  * d_drop() is used mainly for stuff that wants to invalidate a dentry for some
  * reason (NFS timeouts or autofs deletes).
  *
- * __d_drop requires dentry->d_lock.
+ * __d_drop requires dentry->d_lock
+ * ___d_drop doesn't mark dentry as "unhashed"
+ *   (dentry->d_hash.pprev will be LIST_POISON2, not NULL).
  */
-void __d_drop(struct dentry *dentry)
+static void ___d_drop(struct dentry *dentry)
 {
        if (!d_unhashed(dentry)) {
                struct hlist_bl_head *b;
@@ -486,12 +488,17 @@ void __d_drop(struct dentry *dentry)
 
                hlist_bl_lock(b);
                __hlist_bl_del(&dentry->d_hash);
-               dentry->d_hash.pprev = NULL;
                hlist_bl_unlock(b);
                /* After this call, in-progress rcu-walk path lookup will fail. */
                write_seqcount_invalidate(&dentry->d_seq);
        }
 }
+
+void __d_drop(struct dentry *dentry)
+{
+       ___d_drop(dentry);
+       dentry->d_hash.pprev = NULL;
+}
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(__d_drop);
 
 void d_drop(struct dentry *dentry)
@@ -2386,7 +2393,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(d_delete);
 static void __d_rehash(struct dentry *entry)
 {
        struct hlist_bl_head *b = d_hash(entry->d_name.hash);
-       BUG_ON(!d_unhashed(entry));
+
        hlist_bl_lock(b);
        hlist_bl_add_head_rcu(&entry->d_hash, b);
        hlist_bl_unlock(b);
@@ -2821,9 +2828,9 @@ static void __d_move(struct dentry *dentry, struct dentry *target,
        write_seqcount_begin_nested(&target->d_seq, DENTRY_D_LOCK_NESTED);
 
        /* unhash both */
-       /* __d_drop does write_seqcount_barrier, but they're OK to nest. */
-       __d_drop(dentry);
-       __d_drop(target);
+       /* ___d_drop does write_seqcount_barrier, but they're OK to nest. */
+       ___d_drop(dentry);
+       ___d_drop(target);
 
        /* Switch the names.. */
        if (exchange)
@@ -2835,6 +2842,8 @@ static void __d_move(struct dentry *dentry, struct dentry *target,
        __d_rehash(dentry);
        if (exchange)
                __d_rehash(target);
+       else
+               target->d_hash.pprev = NULL;
 
        /* ... and switch them in the tree */
        if (IS_ROOT(dentry)) {