Skip to contentSkip to conversation

FAILED: patch "[PATCH] fsnotify: Fix possible use-after-free in inode iteration on" failed to apply to 4.4-stable tree

PATCH [email protected] 1 participant 1 message Jan 6, 2017

Subsystems (2)
Stable branch Fsnotify: filesystem notification infrastructure
lore
Share & tools
lore

[email protected]

author maintainer
#0 lore raw

The patch below does not apply to the 4.4-stable tree.
If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or longterm tree, then please email the backport, including the original git commit id to <[email protected]>.

thanks,

greg k-h

------------------ original commit in Linus's tree ------------------

Quoted 1 line

From 5716863e0f8251d3360d4cbfc0e44e08007075df Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001

From: Jan Kara <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2016 16:08:41 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] fsnotify: Fix possible use-after-free in inode iteration on
umount

fsnotify_unmount_inodes() plays complex tricks to pin next inode in the sb->s_inodes list when iterating over all inodes. Furthermore the code has a bug that if the current inode is the last on i_sb_list that does not have e.g. I_FREEING set, then we leave next_i pointing to inode which may get removed from the i_sb_list once we drop s_inode_list_lock thus resulting in use-after-free issues (usually manifesting as infinite looping in fsnotify_unmount_inodes()).

Fix the problem by keeping current inode pinned somewhat longer. Then we can make the code much simpler and standard.

CC [email protected]
Signed-off-by Jan Kara <[email protected]>
fs/notify/inode_mark.c +9 -36
index 741077deef3b..a3645249f7ec 100644
@@ -150,12 +150,10 @@ int fsnotify_add_inode_mark(struct fsnotify_mark *mark,
  */
 void fsnotify_unmount_inodes(struct super_block *sb)
 {
-	struct inode *inode, *next_i, *need_iput = NULL;
+	struct inode *inode, *iput_inode = NULL;
 
 	spin_lock(&sb->s_inode_list_lock);
-	list_for_each_entry_safe(inode, next_i, &sb->s_inodes, i_sb_list) {
-		struct inode *need_iput_tmp;
-
+	list_for_each_entry(inode, &sb->s_inodes, i_sb_list) {
 		/*
 		 * We cannot __iget() an inode in state I_FREEING,
 		 * I_WILL_FREE, or I_NEW which is fine because by that point

@@ -178,49 +176,24 @@ void fsnotify_unmount_inodes(struct super_block *sb)
 			continue;
 		}
 
-		need_iput_tmp = need_iput;
-		need_iput = NULL;
-
-		/* In case fsnotify_inode_delete() drops a reference. */
-		if (inode != need_iput_tmp)
-			__iget(inode);
-		else
-			need_iput_tmp = NULL;
+		__iget(inode);
 		spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock);
-
-		/* In case the dropping of a reference would nuke next_i. */
-		while (&next_i->i_sb_list != &sb->s_inodes) {
-			spin_lock(&next_i->i_lock);
-			if (!(next_i->i_state & (I_FREEING | I_WILL_FREE)) &&
-						atomic_read(&next_i->i_count)) {
-				__iget(next_i);
-				need_iput = next_i;
-				spin_unlock(&next_i->i_lock);
-				break;
-			}
-			spin_unlock(&next_i->i_lock);
-			next_i = list_next_entry(next_i, i_sb_list);
-		}
-
-		/*
-		 * We can safely drop s_inode_list_lock here because either
-		 * we actually hold references on both inode and next_i or
-		 * end of list.  Also no new inodes will be added since the
-		 * umount has begun.
-		 */
 		spin_unlock(&sb->s_inode_list_lock);
 
-		if (need_iput_tmp)
-			iput(need_iput_tmp);
+		if (iput_inode)
+			iput(iput_inode);
 
 		/* for each watch, send FS_UNMOUNT and then remove it */
 		fsnotify(inode, FS_UNMOUNT, inode, FSNOTIFY_EVENT_INODE, NULL, 0);
 
 		fsnotify_inode_delete(inode);
 
-		iput(inode);
+		iput_inode = inode;
 
 		spin_lock(&sb->s_inode_list_lock);
 	}
 	spin_unlock(&sb->s_inode_list_lock);
+
+	if (iput_inode)
+		iput(iput_inode);
 }