Patch "fsnotify: Fix possible use-after-free in inode iteration on umount" has been added to the 4.9-stable tree
This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled
fsnotify: Fix possible use-after-free in inode iteration on umount
to the 4.9-stable tree which can be found at:
http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git;a=summary
The filename of the patch is:
fsnotify-fix-possible-use-after-free-in-inode-iteration-on-umount.patch
and it can be found in the queue-4.9 subdirectory.
If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable tree, please let <[email protected]> know about it.
Quoted 1 line
From
5716863e0f8251d3360d4cbfc0e44e08007075dfMon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jan Kara <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2016 16:08:41 +0100
Subject: fsnotify: Fix possible use-after-free in inode iteration on umount
From: Jan Kara <[email protected]>
commit 5716863e0f8251d3360d4cbfc0e44e08007075df upstream.
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.
--- fs/notify/inode_mark.c | 45 +++++++++------------------------------------ 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-)
fs/notify/inode_mark.c +9 -36
@@ -150,12 +150,10 @@ int fsnotify_add_inode_mark(struct fsnot*/ 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 supecontinue ; } - 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); }
Patches currently in stable-queue which might be from [email protected] are
queue-4.9/fsnotify-fix-possible-use-after-free-in-inode-iteration-on-umount.patch queue-4.9/block-protect-iterate_bdevs-against-concurrent-close.patch