linux/fs/fuse/dev.c

2533 lines
57 KiB

fuse: {io-uring} Handle teardown of ring entries On teardown struct file_operations::uring_cmd requests need to be completed by calling io_uring_cmd_done(). Not completing all ring entries would result in busy io-uring tasks giving warning messages in intervals and unreleased struct file. Additionally the fuse connection and with that the ring can only get released when all io-uring commands are completed. Completion is done with ring entries that are a) in waiting state for new fuse requests - io_uring_cmd_done is needed b) already in userspace - io_uring_cmd_done through teardown is not needed, the request can just get released. If fuse server is still active and commits such a ring entry, fuse_uring_cmd() already checks if the connection is active and then complete the io-uring itself with -ENOTCONN. I.e. special handling is not needed. This scheme is basically represented by the ring entry state FRRS_WAIT and FRRS_USERSPACE. Entries in state: - FRRS_INIT: No action needed, do not contribute to ring->queue_refs yet - All other states: Are currently processed by other tasks, async teardown is needed and it has to wait for the two states above. It could be also solved without an async teardown task, but would require additional if conditions in hot code paths. Also in my personal opinion the code looks cleaner with async teardown. Signed-off-by: Bernd Schubert <bschubert@ddn.com> Reviewed-by: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com> # io_uring Reviewed-by: Luis Henriques <luis@igalia.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2025-01-20 02:29:04 +01:00
fuse: support splice() writing to fuse device Allow userspace filesystem implementation to use splice() to write to the fuse device. The semantics of using splice() are: 1) buffer the message header and data in a temporary pipe 2) with a *single* splice() call move the message from the temporary pipe to the fuse device The READ reply message has the most interesting use for this, since now the data from an arbitrary file descriptor (which could be a regular file, a block device or a socket) can be tranferred into the fuse device without having to go through a userspace buffer. It will also allow zero copy moving of pages. One caveat is that the protocol on the fuse device requires the length of the whole message to be written into the header. But the length of the data transferred into the temporary pipe may not be known in advance. The current library implementation works around this by using vmplice to write the header and modifying the header after splicing the data into the pipe (error handling omitted): struct fuse_out_header out; iov.iov_base = &out; iov.iov_len = sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); vmsplice(pip[1], &iov, 1, 0); len = splice(input_fd, input_offset, pip[1], NULL, len, 0); /* retrospectively modify the header: */ out.len = len + sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); splice(pip[0], NULL, fuse_chan_fd(req->ch), NULL, out.len, flags); This works since vmsplice only saves a pointer to the data, it does not copy the data itself. Since pipes are currently limited to 16 pages and messages need to be spliced atomically, the length of the data is limited to 15 pages (or 60kB for 4k pages). Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
2010-05-25 15:06:06 +02:00
driver core: add devname module aliases to allow module on-demand auto-loading This adds: alias: devname:<name> to some common kernel modules, which will allow the on-demand loading of the kernel module when the device node is accessed. Ideally all these modules would be compiled-in, but distros seems too much in love with their modularization that we need to cover the common cases with this new facility. It will allow us to remove a bunch of pretty useless init scripts and modprobes from init scripts. The static device node aliases will be carried in the module itself. The program depmod will extract this information to a file in the module directory: $ cat /lib/modules/2.6.34-00650-g537b60d-dirty/modules.devname # Device nodes to trigger on-demand module loading. microcode cpu/microcode c10:184 fuse fuse c10:229 ppp_generic ppp c108:0 tun net/tun c10:200 dm_mod mapper/control c10:235 Udev will pick up the depmod created file on startup and create all the static device nodes which the kernel modules specify, so that these modules get automatically loaded when the device node is accessed: $ /sbin/udevd --debug ... static_dev_create_from_modules: mknod '/dev/cpu/microcode' c10:184 static_dev_create_from_modules: mknod '/dev/fuse' c10:229 static_dev_create_from_modules: mknod '/dev/ppp' c108:0 static_dev_create_from_modules: mknod '/dev/net/tun' c10:200 static_dev_create_from_modules: mknod '/dev/mapper/control' c10:235 udev_rules_apply_static_dev_perms: chmod '/dev/net/tun' 0666 udev_rules_apply_static_dev_perms: chmod '/dev/fuse' 0666 A few device nodes are switched to statically allocated numbers, to allow the static nodes to work. This might also useful for systems which still run a plain static /dev, which is completely unsafe to use with any dynamic minor numbers. Note: The devname aliases must be limited to the *common* and *single*instance* device nodes, like the misc devices, and never be used for conceptually limited systems like the loop devices, which should rather get fixed properly and get a control node for losetup to talk to, instead of creating a random number of device nodes in advance, regardless if they are ever used. This facility is to hide the mess distros are creating with too modualized kernels, and just to hide that these modules are not compiled-in, and not to paper-over broken concepts. Thanks! :) Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de> Cc: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net> Cc: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Cc: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com> Cc: Alasdair G Kergon <agk@redhat.com> Cc: Tigran Aivazian <tigran@aivazian.fsnet.co.uk> Cc: Ian Kent <raven@themaw.net> Signed-Off-By: Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@vrfy.org> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
2010-05-20 18:07:20 +02:00
fuse: fix deadlock with aio poll and fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock When IOCB_CMD_POLL is used on the FUSE device, aio_poll() disables IRQs and takes kioctx::ctx_lock, then fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock. This may have to wait for fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock to be released by one of many places that take it with IRQs enabled. Since the IRQ handler may take kioctx::ctx_lock, lockdep reports that a deadlock is possible. Fix it by protecting the state of struct fuse_iqueue with a separate spinlock, and only accessing fuse_iqueue::waitq using the versions of the waitqueue functions which do IRQ-safe locking internally. Reproducer: #include <fcntl.h> #include <stdio.h> #include <sys/mount.h> #include <sys/stat.h> #include <sys/syscall.h> #include <unistd.h> #include <linux/aio_abi.h> int main() { char opts[128]; int fd = open("/dev/fuse", O_RDWR); aio_context_t ctx = 0; struct iocb cb = { .aio_lio_opcode = IOCB_CMD_POLL, .aio_fildes = fd }; struct iocb *cbp = &cb; sprintf(opts, "fd=%d,rootmode=040000,user_id=0,group_id=0", fd); mkdir("mnt", 0700); mount("foo", "mnt", "fuse", 0, opts); syscall(__NR_io_setup, 1, &ctx); syscall(__NR_io_submit, ctx, 1, &cbp); } Beginning of lockdep output: ===================================================== WARNING: SOFTIRQ-safe -> SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order detected 5.3.0-rc5 #9 Not tainted ----------------------------------------------------- syz_fuse/135 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE0:SE1] is trying to acquire: 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: spin_lock include/linux/spinlock.h:338 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1751 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x203/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 and this task is already holding: 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: spin_lock_irq include/linux/spinlock.h:363 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1749 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x1f4/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 which would create a new lock dependency: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} -> (&fiq->waitq){+.+.} but this new dependency connects a SOFTIRQ-irq-safe lock: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} [...] Reported-by: syzbot+af05535bb79520f95431@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Reported-by: syzbot+d86c4426a01f60feddc7@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Fixes: bfe4037e722e ("aio: implement IOCB_CMD_POLL") Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v4.19+ Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2019-09-08 20:15:18 -07:00
fuse: fix deadlock with aio poll and fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock When IOCB_CMD_POLL is used on the FUSE device, aio_poll() disables IRQs and takes kioctx::ctx_lock, then fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock. This may have to wait for fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock to be released by one of many places that take it with IRQs enabled. Since the IRQ handler may take kioctx::ctx_lock, lockdep reports that a deadlock is possible. Fix it by protecting the state of struct fuse_iqueue with a separate spinlock, and only accessing fuse_iqueue::waitq using the versions of the waitqueue functions which do IRQ-safe locking internally. Reproducer: #include <fcntl.h> #include <stdio.h> #include <sys/mount.h> #include <sys/stat.h> #include <sys/syscall.h> #include <unistd.h> #include <linux/aio_abi.h> int main() { char opts[128]; int fd = open("/dev/fuse", O_RDWR); aio_context_t ctx = 0; struct iocb cb = { .aio_lio_opcode = IOCB_CMD_POLL, .aio_fildes = fd }; struct iocb *cbp = &cb; sprintf(opts, "fd=%d,rootmode=040000,user_id=0,group_id=0", fd); mkdir("mnt", 0700); mount("foo", "mnt", "fuse", 0, opts); syscall(__NR_io_setup, 1, &ctx); syscall(__NR_io_submit, ctx, 1, &cbp); } Beginning of lockdep output: ===================================================== WARNING: SOFTIRQ-safe -> SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order detected 5.3.0-rc5 #9 Not tainted ----------------------------------------------------- syz_fuse/135 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE0:SE1] is trying to acquire: 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: spin_lock include/linux/spinlock.h:338 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1751 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x203/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 and this task is already holding: 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: spin_lock_irq include/linux/spinlock.h:363 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1749 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x1f4/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 which would create a new lock dependency: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} -> (&fiq->waitq){+.+.} but this new dependency connects a SOFTIRQ-irq-safe lock: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} [...] Reported-by: syzbot+af05535bb79520f95431@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Reported-by: syzbot+d86c4426a01f60feddc7@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Fixes: bfe4037e722e ("aio: implement IOCB_CMD_POLL") Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v4.19+ Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2019-09-08 20:15:18 -07:00
fuse: fix deadlock with aio poll and fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock When IOCB_CMD_POLL is used on the FUSE device, aio_poll() disables IRQs and takes kioctx::ctx_lock, then fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock. This may have to wait for fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock to be released by one of many places that take it with IRQs enabled. Since the IRQ handler may take kioctx::ctx_lock, lockdep reports that a deadlock is possible. Fix it by protecting the state of struct fuse_iqueue with a separate spinlock, and only accessing fuse_iqueue::waitq using the versions of the waitqueue functions which do IRQ-safe locking internally. Reproducer: #include <fcntl.h> #include <stdio.h> #include <sys/mount.h> #include <sys/stat.h> #include <sys/syscall.h> #include <unistd.h> #include <linux/aio_abi.h> int main() { char opts[128]; int fd = open("/dev/fuse", O_RDWR); aio_context_t ctx = 0; struct iocb cb = { .aio_lio_opcode = IOCB_CMD_POLL, .aio_fildes = fd }; struct iocb *cbp = &cb; sprintf(opts, "fd=%d,rootmode=040000,user_id=0,group_id=0", fd); mkdir("mnt", 0700); mount("foo", "mnt", "fuse", 0, opts); syscall(__NR_io_setup, 1, &ctx); syscall(__NR_io_submit, ctx, 1, &cbp); } Beginning of lockdep output: ===================================================== WARNING: SOFTIRQ-safe -> SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order detected 5.3.0-rc5 #9 Not tainted ----------------------------------------------------- syz_fuse/135 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE0:SE1] is trying to acquire: 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: spin_lock include/linux/spinlock.h:338 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1751 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x203/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 and this task is already holding: 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: spin_lock_irq include/linux/spinlock.h:363 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1749 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x1f4/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 which would create a new lock dependency: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} -> (&fiq->waitq){+.+.} but this new dependency connects a SOFTIRQ-irq-safe lock: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} [...] Reported-by: syzbot+af05535bb79520f95431@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Reported-by: syzbot+d86c4426a01f60feddc7@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Fixes: bfe4037e722e ("aio: implement IOCB_CMD_POLL") Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v4.19+ Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2019-09-08 20:15:18 -07:00
fuse: fix deadlock with aio poll and fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock When IOCB_CMD_POLL is used on the FUSE device, aio_poll() disables IRQs and takes kioctx::ctx_lock, then fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock. This may have to wait for fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock to be released by one of many places that take it with IRQs enabled. Since the IRQ handler may take kioctx::ctx_lock, lockdep reports that a deadlock is possible. Fix it by protecting the state of struct fuse_iqueue with a separate spinlock, and only accessing fuse_iqueue::waitq using the versions of the waitqueue functions which do IRQ-safe locking internally. Reproducer: #include <fcntl.h> #include <stdio.h> #include <sys/mount.h> #include <sys/stat.h> #include <sys/syscall.h> #include <unistd.h> #include <linux/aio_abi.h> int main() { char opts[128]; int fd = open("/dev/fuse", O_RDWR); aio_context_t ctx = 0; struct iocb cb = { .aio_lio_opcode = IOCB_CMD_POLL, .aio_fildes = fd }; struct iocb *cbp = &cb; sprintf(opts, "fd=%d,rootmode=040000,user_id=0,group_id=0", fd); mkdir("mnt", 0700); mount("foo", "mnt", "fuse", 0, opts); syscall(__NR_io_setup, 1, &ctx); syscall(__NR_io_submit, ctx, 1, &cbp); } Beginning of lockdep output: ===================================================== WARNING: SOFTIRQ-safe -> SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order detected 5.3.0-rc5 #9 Not tainted ----------------------------------------------------- syz_fuse/135 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE0:SE1] is trying to acquire: 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: spin_lock include/linux/spinlock.h:338 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1751 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x203/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 and this task is already holding: 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: spin_lock_irq include/linux/spinlock.h:363 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1749 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x1f4/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 which would create a new lock dependency: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} -> (&fiq->waitq){+.+.} but this new dependency connects a SOFTIRQ-irq-safe lock: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} [...] Reported-by: syzbot+af05535bb79520f95431@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Reported-by: syzbot+d86c4426a01f60feddc7@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Fixes: bfe4037e722e ("aio: implement IOCB_CMD_POLL") Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v4.19+ Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2019-09-08 20:15:18 -07:00
fuse: fix deadlock with aio poll and fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock When IOCB_CMD_POLL is used on the FUSE device, aio_poll() disables IRQs and takes kioctx::ctx_lock, then fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock. This may have to wait for fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock to be released by one of many places that take it with IRQs enabled. Since the IRQ handler may take kioctx::ctx_lock, lockdep reports that a deadlock is possible. Fix it by protecting the state of struct fuse_iqueue with a separate spinlock, and only accessing fuse_iqueue::waitq using the versions of the waitqueue functions which do IRQ-safe locking internally. Reproducer: #include <fcntl.h> #include <stdio.h> #include <sys/mount.h> #include <sys/stat.h> #include <sys/syscall.h> #include <unistd.h> #include <linux/aio_abi.h> int main() { char opts[128]; int fd = open("/dev/fuse", O_RDWR); aio_context_t ctx = 0; struct iocb cb = { .aio_lio_opcode = IOCB_CMD_POLL, .aio_fildes = fd }; struct iocb *cbp = &cb; sprintf(opts, "fd=%d,rootmode=040000,user_id=0,group_id=0", fd); mkdir("mnt", 0700); mount("foo", "mnt", "fuse", 0, opts); syscall(__NR_io_setup, 1, &ctx); syscall(__NR_io_submit, ctx, 1, &cbp); } Beginning of lockdep output: ===================================================== WARNING: SOFTIRQ-safe -> SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order detected 5.3.0-rc5 #9 Not tainted ----------------------------------------------------- syz_fuse/135 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE0:SE1] is trying to acquire: 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: spin_lock include/linux/spinlock.h:338 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1751 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x203/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 and this task is already holding: 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: spin_lock_irq include/linux/spinlock.h:363 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1749 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x1f4/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 which would create a new lock dependency: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} -> (&fiq->waitq){+.+.} but this new dependency connects a SOFTIRQ-irq-safe lock: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} [...] Reported-by: syzbot+af05535bb79520f95431@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Reported-by: syzbot+d86c4426a01f60feddc7@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Fixes: bfe4037e722e ("aio: implement IOCB_CMD_POLL") Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v4.19+ Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2019-09-08 20:15:18 -07:00
fs/fuse: fix null-ptr-deref when checking SB_I_NOIDMAP flag It was reported [1] that on linux-next/fs-next the following crash is reproducible: [ 42.659136] Oops: general protection fault, probably for non-canonical address 0xdffffc000000000b: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP KASAN NOPTI [ 42.660501] fbcon: Taking over console [ 42.660930] KASAN: null-ptr-deref in range [0x0000000000000058-0x000000000000005f] [ 42.661752] CPU: 1 UID: 0 PID: 1589 Comm: dtprobed Not tainted 6.11.0-rc6+ #1 [ 42.662565] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.6.6 08/22/2023 [ 42.663472] RIP: 0010:fuse_get_req+0x36b/0x990 [fuse] [ 42.664046] Code: 48 89 fa 48 c1 ea 03 80 3c 02 00 0f 85 8c 05 00 00 48 b8 00 00 00 00 00 fc ff df 48 8b 6d 08 48 8d 7d 58 48 89 fa 48 c1 ea 03 <80> 3c 02 00 0f 85 4d 05 00 00 f6 45 59 20 0f 85 06 03 00 00 48 83 [ 42.666945] RSP: 0018:ffffc900009a7730 EFLAGS: 00010212 [ 42.668837] RAX: dffffc0000000000 RBX: 1ffff92000134eed RCX: ffffffffc20dec9a [ 42.670122] RDX: 000000000000000b RSI: 0000000000000008 RDI: 0000000000000058 [ 42.672154] RBP: 0000000000000000 R08: 0000000000000001 R09: ffffed1022110172 [ 42.672160] R10: ffff888110880b97 R11: ffffc900009a737a R12: 0000000000000001 [ 42.672179] R13: ffff888110880b60 R14: ffff888110880b90 R15: ffff888169973840 [ 42.672186] FS: 00007f28cd21d7c0(0000) GS:ffff8883ef280000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 [ 42.672191] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 [ 42.[ CR02: ;32m00007f3237366208 CR3: 0 OK 79e001 CR4: 0000000000770ef0 [ 42.672214] PKRU: 55555554 [ 42.672218] Call Trace: [ 42.672223] <TASK> [ 42.672226] ? die_addr+0x41/0xa0 [ 42.672238] ? exc_general_protection+0x14c/0x230 [ 42.672250] ? asm_exc_general_protection+0x26/0x30 [ 42.672260] ? fuse_get_req+0x77a/0x990 [fuse] [ 42.672281] ? fuse_get_req+0x36b/0x990 [fuse] [ 42.672300] ? kasan_unpoison+0x27/0x60 [ 42.672310] ? __pfx_fuse_get_req+0x10/0x10 [fuse] [ 42.672327] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5 [ 42.672333] ? alloc_pages_mpol_noprof+0x195/0x440 [ 42.672340] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5 [ 42.672345] ? kasan_unpoison+0x27/0x60 [ 42.672350] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5 [ 42.672355] ? __kasan_slab_alloc+0x4d/0x90 [ 42.672362] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5 [ 42.672367] ? __kmalloc_cache_noprof+0x134/0x350 [ 42.672376] fuse_simple_background+0xe7/0x180 [fuse] [ 42.672406] cuse_channel_open+0x540/0x710 [cuse] [ 42.672415] misc_open+0x2a7/0x3a0 [ 42.672424] chrdev_open+0x1ef/0x5f0 [ 42.672432] ? __pfx_chrdev_open+0x10/0x10 [ 42.672439] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5 [ 42.672443] ? security_file_open+0x3bb/0x720 [ 42.672451] do_dentry_open+0x43d/0x1200 [ 42.672459] ? __pfx_chrdev_open+0x10/0x10 [ 42.672468] vfs_open+0x79/0x340 [ 42.672475] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5 [ 42.672482] do_open+0x68c/0x11e0 [ 42.672489] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5 [ 42.672495] ? __pfx_do_open+0x10/0x10 [ 42.672501] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5 [ 42.672506] ? open_last_lookups+0x2a2/0x1370 [ 42.672515] path_openat+0x24f/0x640 [ 42.672522] ? __pfx_path_openat+0x10/0x10 [ 42.723972] ? stack_depot_save_flags+0x45/0x4b0 [ 42.724787] ? __fput+0x43c/0xa70 [ 42.725100] do_filp_open+0x1b3/0x3e0 [ 42.725710] ? poison_slab_object+0x10d/0x190 [ 42.726145] ? __kasan_slab_free+0x33/0x50 [ 42.726570] ? __pfx_do_filp_open+0x10/0x10 [ 42.726981] ? do_syscall_64+0x64/0x170 [ 42.727418] ? entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e [ 42.728018] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5 [ 42.728505] ? do_raw_spin_lock+0x131/0x270 [ 42.728922] ? __pfx_do_raw_spin_lock+0x10/0x10 [ 42.729494] ? do_raw_spin_unlock+0x14c/0x1f0 [ 42.729992] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5 [ 42.730889] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5 [ 42.732178] ? alloc_fd+0x176/0x5e0 [ 42.732585] do_sys_openat2+0x122/0x160 [ 42.732929] ? __pfx_do_sys_openat2+0x10/0x10 [ 42.733448] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5 [ 42.734013] ? __pfx_map_id_up+0x10/0x10 [ 42.734482] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5 [ 42.735529] ? __memcg_slab_free_hook+0x292/0x500 [ 42.736131] __x64_sys_openat+0x123/0x1e0 [ 42.736526] ? __pfx___x64_sys_openat+0x10/0x10 [ 42.737369] ? __x64_sys_close+0x7c/0xd0 [ 42.737717] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5 [ 42.738192] ? syscall_trace_enter+0x11e/0x1b0 [ 42.738739] do_syscall_64+0x64/0x170 [ 42.739113] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e [ 42.739638] RIP: 0033:0x7f28cd13e87b [ 42.740038] Code: 25 00 00 41 00 3d 00 00 41 00 74 4b 64 8b 04 25 18 00 00 00 85 c0 75 67 44 89 e2 48 89 ee bf 9c ff ff ff b8 01 01 00 00 0f 05 <48> 3d 00 f0 ff ff 0f 87 91 00 00 00 48 8b 54 24 28 64 48 2b 14 25 [ 42.741943] RSP: 002b:00007ffc992546c0 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000101 [ 42.742951] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00007f28cd44f1ee RCX: 00007f28cd13e87b [ 42.743660] RDX: 0000000000000002 RSI: 00007f28cd44f2fa RDI: 00000000ffffff9c [ 42.744518] RBP: 00007f28cd44f2fa R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000001 [ 42.745211] R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 0000000000000002 [ 42.745920] R13: 00007f28cd44f2fa R14: 0000000000000000 R15: 0000000000000003 [ 42.746708] </TASK> [ 42.746937] Modules linked in: cuse vfat fat ext4 mbcache jbd2 intel_rapl_msr intel_rapl_common kvm_amd ccp bochs drm_vram_helper kvm drm_ttm_helper ttm pcspkr i2c_piix4 drm_kms_helper i2c_smbus pvpanic_mmio pvpanic joydev sch_fq_codel drm fuse xfs nvme_tcp nvme_fabrics nvme_core sd_mod sg virtio_net net_failover virtio_scsi failover crct10dif_pclmul crc32_pclmul ata_generic pata_acpi ata_piix ghash_clmulni_intel virtio_pci sha512_ssse3 virtio_pci_legacy_dev sha256_ssse3 virtio_pci_modern_dev sha1_ssse3 libata serio_raw dm_multipath btrfs blake2b_generic xor zstd_compress raid6_pq sunrpc dm_mirror dm_region_hash dm_log dm_mod be2iscsi bnx2i cnic uio cxgb4i cxgb4 tls cxgb3i cxgb3 mdio libcxgbi libcxgb qla4xxx iscsi_boot_sysfs iscsi_tcp libiscsi_tcp libiscsi scsi_transport_iscsi qemu_fw_cfg aesni_intel crypto_simd cryptd [ 42.754333] ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]--- [ 42.756899] RIP: 0010:fuse_get_req+0x36b/0x990 [fuse] [ 42.757851] Code: 48 89 fa 48 c1 ea 03 80 3c 02 00 0f 85 8c 05 00 00 48 b8 00 00 00 00 00 fc ff df 48 8b 6d 08 48 8d 7d 58 48 89 fa 48 c1 ea 03 <80> 3c 02 00 0f 85 4d 05 00 00 f6 45 59 20 0f 85 06 03 00 00 48 83 [ 42.760334] RSP: 0018:ffffc900009a7730 EFLAGS: 00010212 [ 42.760940] RAX: dffffc0000000000 RBX: 1ffff92000134eed RCX: ffffffffc20dec9a [ 42.761697] RDX: 000000000000000b RSI: 0000000000000008 RDI: 0000000000000058 [ 42.763009] RBP: 0000000000000000 R08: 0000000000000001 R09: ffffed1022110172 [ 42.763920] R10: ffff888110880b97 R11: ffffc900009a737a R12: 0000000000000001 [ 42.764839] R13: ffff888110880b60 R14: ffff888110880b90 R15: ffff888169973840 [ 42.765716] FS: 00007f28cd21d7c0(0000) GS:ffff8883ef280000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 [ 42.766890] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 [ 42.767828] CR2: 00007f3237366208 CR3: 000000012c79e001 CR4: 0000000000770ef0 [ 42.768730] PKRU: 55555554 [ 42.769022] Kernel panic - not syncing: Fatal exception [ 42.770758] Kernel Offset: 0x7200000 from 0xffffffff81000000 (relocation range: 0xffffffff80000000-0xffffffffbfffffff) [ 42.771947] ---[ end Kernel panic - not syncing: Fatal exception ]--- It's obviously CUSE related callstack. For CUSE case, we don't have superblock and our checks for SB_I_NOIDMAP flag does not make any sense. Let's handle this case gracefully. Fixes: aa16880d9f13 ("fuse: add basic infrastructure to support idmappings") Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-next/87v7z586py.fsf@debian-BULLSEYE-live-builder-AMD64/ [1] Reported-by: Chandan Babu R <chandanbabu@kernel.org> Reported-by: syzbot+20c7e20cc8f5296dca12@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Signed-off-by: Alexander Mikhalitsyn <aleksandr.mikhalitsyn@canonical.com> Reviewed-by: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2024-09-12 16:58:24 +02:00
fuse: support splice() writing to fuse device Allow userspace filesystem implementation to use splice() to write to the fuse device. The semantics of using splice() are: 1) buffer the message header and data in a temporary pipe 2) with a *single* splice() call move the message from the temporary pipe to the fuse device The READ reply message has the most interesting use for this, since now the data from an arbitrary file descriptor (which could be a regular file, a block device or a socket) can be tranferred into the fuse device without having to go through a userspace buffer. It will also allow zero copy moving of pages. One caveat is that the protocol on the fuse device requires the length of the whole message to be written into the header. But the length of the data transferred into the temporary pipe may not be known in advance. The current library implementation works around this by using vmplice to write the header and modifying the header after splicing the data into the pipe (error handling omitted): struct fuse_out_header out; iov.iov_base = &out; iov.iov_len = sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); vmsplice(pip[1], &iov, 1, 0); len = splice(input_fd, input_offset, pip[1], NULL, len, 0); /* retrospectively modify the header: */ out.len = len + sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); splice(pip[0], NULL, fuse_chan_fd(req->ch), NULL, out.len, flags); This works since vmsplice only saves a pointer to the data, it does not copy the data itself. Since pipes are currently limited to 16 pages and messages need to be spliced atomically, the length of the data is limited to 15 pages (or 60kB for 4k pages). Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
2010-05-25 15:06:06 +02:00
fuse: support splice() writing to fuse device Allow userspace filesystem implementation to use splice() to write to the fuse device. The semantics of using splice() are: 1) buffer the message header and data in a temporary pipe 2) with a *single* splice() call move the message from the temporary pipe to the fuse device The READ reply message has the most interesting use for this, since now the data from an arbitrary file descriptor (which could be a regular file, a block device or a socket) can be tranferred into the fuse device without having to go through a userspace buffer. It will also allow zero copy moving of pages. One caveat is that the protocol on the fuse device requires the length of the whole message to be written into the header. But the length of the data transferred into the temporary pipe may not be known in advance. The current library implementation works around this by using vmplice to write the header and modifying the header after splicing the data into the pipe (error handling omitted): struct fuse_out_header out; iov.iov_base = &out; iov.iov_len = sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); vmsplice(pip[1], &iov, 1, 0); len = splice(input_fd, input_offset, pip[1], NULL, len, 0); /* retrospectively modify the header: */ out.len = len + sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); splice(pip[0], NULL, fuse_chan_fd(req->ch), NULL, out.len, flags); This works since vmsplice only saves a pointer to the data, it does not copy the data itself. Since pipes are currently limited to 16 pages and messages need to be spliced atomically, the length of the data is limited to 15 pages (or 60kB for 4k pages). Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
2010-05-25 15:06:06 +02:00
fuse: support splice() writing to fuse device Allow userspace filesystem implementation to use splice() to write to the fuse device. The semantics of using splice() are: 1) buffer the message header and data in a temporary pipe 2) with a *single* splice() call move the message from the temporary pipe to the fuse device The READ reply message has the most interesting use for this, since now the data from an arbitrary file descriptor (which could be a regular file, a block device or a socket) can be tranferred into the fuse device without having to go through a userspace buffer. It will also allow zero copy moving of pages. One caveat is that the protocol on the fuse device requires the length of the whole message to be written into the header. But the length of the data transferred into the temporary pipe may not be known in advance. The current library implementation works around this by using vmplice to write the header and modifying the header after splicing the data into the pipe (error handling omitted): struct fuse_out_header out; iov.iov_base = &out; iov.iov_len = sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); vmsplice(pip[1], &iov, 1, 0); len = splice(input_fd, input_offset, pip[1], NULL, len, 0); /* retrospectively modify the header: */ out.len = len + sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); splice(pip[0], NULL, fuse_chan_fd(req->ch), NULL, out.len, flags); This works since vmsplice only saves a pointer to the data, it does not copy the data itself. Since pipes are currently limited to 16 pages and messages need to be spliced atomically, the length of the data is limited to 15 pages (or 60kB for 4k pages). Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
2010-05-25 15:06:06 +02:00
fuse: support splice() writing to fuse device Allow userspace filesystem implementation to use splice() to write to the fuse device. The semantics of using splice() are: 1) buffer the message header and data in a temporary pipe 2) with a *single* splice() call move the message from the temporary pipe to the fuse device The READ reply message has the most interesting use for this, since now the data from an arbitrary file descriptor (which could be a regular file, a block device or a socket) can be tranferred into the fuse device without having to go through a userspace buffer. It will also allow zero copy moving of pages. One caveat is that the protocol on the fuse device requires the length of the whole message to be written into the header. But the length of the data transferred into the temporary pipe may not be known in advance. The current library implementation works around this by using vmplice to write the header and modifying the header after splicing the data into the pipe (error handling omitted): struct fuse_out_header out; iov.iov_base = &out; iov.iov_len = sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); vmsplice(pip[1], &iov, 1, 0); len = splice(input_fd, input_offset, pip[1], NULL, len, 0); /* retrospectively modify the header: */ out.len = len + sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); splice(pip[0], NULL, fuse_chan_fd(req->ch), NULL, out.len, flags); This works since vmsplice only saves a pointer to the data, it does not copy the data itself. Since pipes are currently limited to 16 pages and messages need to be spliced atomically, the length of the data is limited to 15 pages (or 60kB for 4k pages). Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
2010-05-25 15:06:06 +02:00
fuse: support splice() writing to fuse device Allow userspace filesystem implementation to use splice() to write to the fuse device. The semantics of using splice() are: 1) buffer the message header and data in a temporary pipe 2) with a *single* splice() call move the message from the temporary pipe to the fuse device The READ reply message has the most interesting use for this, since now the data from an arbitrary file descriptor (which could be a regular file, a block device or a socket) can be tranferred into the fuse device without having to go through a userspace buffer. It will also allow zero copy moving of pages. One caveat is that the protocol on the fuse device requires the length of the whole message to be written into the header. But the length of the data transferred into the temporary pipe may not be known in advance. The current library implementation works around this by using vmplice to write the header and modifying the header after splicing the data into the pipe (error handling omitted): struct fuse_out_header out; iov.iov_base = &out; iov.iov_len = sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); vmsplice(pip[1], &iov, 1, 0); len = splice(input_fd, input_offset, pip[1], NULL, len, 0); /* retrospectively modify the header: */ out.len = len + sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); splice(pip[0], NULL, fuse_chan_fd(req->ch), NULL, out.len, flags); This works since vmsplice only saves a pointer to the data, it does not copy the data itself. Since pipes are currently limited to 16 pages and messages need to be spliced atomically, the length of the data is limited to 15 pages (or 60kB for 4k pages). Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
2010-05-25 15:06:06 +02:00
mm: multi-gen LRU: groundwork Evictable pages are divided into multiple generations for each lruvec. The youngest generation number is stored in lrugen->max_seq for both anon and file types as they are aged on an equal footing. The oldest generation numbers are stored in lrugen->min_seq[] separately for anon and file types as clean file pages can be evicted regardless of swap constraints. These three variables are monotonically increasing. Generation numbers are truncated into order_base_2(MAX_NR_GENS+1) bits in order to fit into the gen counter in folio->flags. Each truncated generation number is an index to lrugen->lists[]. The sliding window technique is used to track at least MIN_NR_GENS and at most MAX_NR_GENS generations. The gen counter stores a value within [1, MAX_NR_GENS] while a page is on one of lrugen->lists[]. Otherwise it stores 0. There are two conceptually independent procedures: "the aging", which produces young generations, and "the eviction", which consumes old generations. They form a closed-loop system, i.e., "the page reclaim". Both procedures can be invoked from userspace for the purposes of working set estimation and proactive reclaim. These techniques are commonly used to optimize job scheduling (bin packing) in data centers [1][2]. To avoid confusion, the terms "hot" and "cold" will be applied to the multi-gen LRU, as a new convention; the terms "active" and "inactive" will be applied to the active/inactive LRU, as usual. The protection of hot pages and the selection of cold pages are based on page access channels and patterns. There are two access channels: one through page tables and the other through file descriptors. The protection of the former channel is by design stronger because: 1. The uncertainty in determining the access patterns of the former channel is higher due to the approximation of the accessed bit. 2. The cost of evicting the former channel is higher due to the TLB flushes required and the likelihood of encountering the dirty bit. 3. The penalty of underprotecting the former channel is higher because applications usually do not prepare themselves for major page faults like they do for blocked I/O. E.g., GUI applications commonly use dedicated I/O threads to avoid blocking rendering threads. There are also two access patterns: one with temporal locality and the other without. For the reasons listed above, the former channel is assumed to follow the former pattern unless VM_SEQ_READ or VM_RAND_READ is present; the latter channel is assumed to follow the latter pattern unless outlying refaults have been observed [3][4]. The next patch will address the "outlying refaults". Three macros, i.e., LRU_REFS_WIDTH, LRU_REFS_PGOFF and LRU_REFS_MASK, used later are added in this patch to make the entire patchset less diffy. A page is added to the youngest generation on faulting. The aging needs to check the accessed bit at least twice before handing this page over to the eviction. The first check takes care of the accessed bit set on the initial fault; the second check makes sure this page has not been used since then. This protocol, AKA second chance, requires a minimum of two generations, hence MIN_NR_GENS. [1] https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3297858.3304053 [2] https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3503222.3507731 [3] https://lwn.net/Articles/495543/ [4] https://lwn.net/Articles/815342/ Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220918080010.2920238-6-yuzhao@google.com Signed-off-by: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com> Acked-by: Brian Geffon <bgeffon@google.com> Acked-by: Jan Alexander Steffens (heftig) <heftig@archlinux.org> Acked-by: Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@natalenko.name> Acked-by: Steven Barrett <steven@liquorix.net> Acked-by: Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@google.com> Tested-by: Daniel Byrne <djbyrne@mtu.edu> Tested-by: Donald Carr <d@chaos-reins.com> Tested-by: Holger Hoffstätte <holger@applied-asynchrony.com> Tested-by: Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel@yandex.ru> Tested-by: Shuang Zhai <szhai2@cs.rochester.edu> Tested-by: Sofia Trinh <sofia.trinh@edi.works> Tested-by: Vaibhav Jain <vaibhav@linux.ibm.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com> Cc: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com> Cc: Barry Song <baohua@kernel.org> Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com> Cc: Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com> Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org> Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de> Cc: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com> Cc: Michael Larabel <Michael@MichaelLarabel.com> Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> Cc: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org> Cc: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com> Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz> Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
2022-09-18 02:00:02 -06:00
fuse: fix deadlock with aio poll and fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock When IOCB_CMD_POLL is used on the FUSE device, aio_poll() disables IRQs and takes kioctx::ctx_lock, then fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock. This may have to wait for fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock to be released by one of many places that take it with IRQs enabled. Since the IRQ handler may take kioctx::ctx_lock, lockdep reports that a deadlock is possible. Fix it by protecting the state of struct fuse_iqueue with a separate spinlock, and only accessing fuse_iqueue::waitq using the versions of the waitqueue functions which do IRQ-safe locking internally. Reproducer: #include <fcntl.h> #include <stdio.h> #include <sys/mount.h> #include <sys/stat.h> #include <sys/syscall.h> #include <unistd.h> #include <linux/aio_abi.h> int main() { char opts[128]; int fd = open("/dev/fuse", O_RDWR); aio_context_t ctx = 0; struct iocb cb = { .aio_lio_opcode = IOCB_CMD_POLL, .aio_fildes = fd }; struct iocb *cbp = &cb; sprintf(opts, "fd=%d,rootmode=040000,user_id=0,group_id=0", fd); mkdir("mnt", 0700); mount("foo", "mnt", "fuse", 0, opts); syscall(__NR_io_setup, 1, &ctx); syscall(__NR_io_submit, ctx, 1, &cbp); } Beginning of lockdep output: ===================================================== WARNING: SOFTIRQ-safe -> SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order detected 5.3.0-rc5 #9 Not tainted ----------------------------------------------------- syz_fuse/135 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE0:SE1] is trying to acquire: 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: spin_lock include/linux/spinlock.h:338 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1751 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x203/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 and this task is already holding: 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: spin_lock_irq include/linux/spinlock.h:363 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1749 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x1f4/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 which would create a new lock dependency: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} -> (&fiq->waitq){+.+.} but this new dependency connects a SOFTIRQ-irq-safe lock: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} [...] Reported-by: syzbot+af05535bb79520f95431@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Reported-by: syzbot+d86c4426a01f60feddc7@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Fixes: bfe4037e722e ("aio: implement IOCB_CMD_POLL") Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v4.19+ Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2019-09-08 20:15:18 -07:00
fuse: fix deadlock with aio poll and fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock When IOCB_CMD_POLL is used on the FUSE device, aio_poll() disables IRQs and takes kioctx::ctx_lock, then fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock. This may have to wait for fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock to be released by one of many places that take it with IRQs enabled. Since the IRQ handler may take kioctx::ctx_lock, lockdep reports that a deadlock is possible. Fix it by protecting the state of struct fuse_iqueue with a separate spinlock, and only accessing fuse_iqueue::waitq using the versions of the waitqueue functions which do IRQ-safe locking internally. Reproducer: #include <fcntl.h> #include <stdio.h> #include <sys/mount.h> #include <sys/stat.h> #include <sys/syscall.h> #include <unistd.h> #include <linux/aio_abi.h> int main() { char opts[128]; int fd = open("/dev/fuse", O_RDWR); aio_context_t ctx = 0; struct iocb cb = { .aio_lio_opcode = IOCB_CMD_POLL, .aio_fildes = fd }; struct iocb *cbp = &cb; sprintf(opts, "fd=%d,rootmode=040000,user_id=0,group_id=0", fd); mkdir("mnt", 0700); mount("foo", "mnt", "fuse", 0, opts); syscall(__NR_io_setup, 1, &ctx); syscall(__NR_io_submit, ctx, 1, &cbp); } Beginning of lockdep output: ===================================================== WARNING: SOFTIRQ-safe -> SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order detected 5.3.0-rc5 #9 Not tainted ----------------------------------------------------- syz_fuse/135 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE0:SE1] is trying to acquire: 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: spin_lock include/linux/spinlock.h:338 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1751 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x203/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 and this task is already holding: 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: spin_lock_irq include/linux/spinlock.h:363 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1749 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x1f4/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 which would create a new lock dependency: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} -> (&fiq->waitq){+.+.} but this new dependency connects a SOFTIRQ-irq-safe lock: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} [...] Reported-by: syzbot+af05535bb79520f95431@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Reported-by: syzbot+d86c4426a01f60feddc7@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Fixes: bfe4037e722e ("aio: implement IOCB_CMD_POLL") Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v4.19+ Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2019-09-08 20:15:18 -07:00
fuse: fix deadlock with aio poll and fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock When IOCB_CMD_POLL is used on the FUSE device, aio_poll() disables IRQs and takes kioctx::ctx_lock, then fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock. This may have to wait for fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock to be released by one of many places that take it with IRQs enabled. Since the IRQ handler may take kioctx::ctx_lock, lockdep reports that a deadlock is possible. Fix it by protecting the state of struct fuse_iqueue with a separate spinlock, and only accessing fuse_iqueue::waitq using the versions of the waitqueue functions which do IRQ-safe locking internally. Reproducer: #include <fcntl.h> #include <stdio.h> #include <sys/mount.h> #include <sys/stat.h> #include <sys/syscall.h> #include <unistd.h> #include <linux/aio_abi.h> int main() { char opts[128]; int fd = open("/dev/fuse", O_RDWR); aio_context_t ctx = 0; struct iocb cb = { .aio_lio_opcode = IOCB_CMD_POLL, .aio_fildes = fd }; struct iocb *cbp = &cb; sprintf(opts, "fd=%d,rootmode=040000,user_id=0,group_id=0", fd); mkdir("mnt", 0700); mount("foo", "mnt", "fuse", 0, opts); syscall(__NR_io_setup, 1, &ctx); syscall(__NR_io_submit, ctx, 1, &cbp); } Beginning of lockdep output: ===================================================== WARNING: SOFTIRQ-safe -> SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order detected 5.3.0-rc5 #9 Not tainted ----------------------------------------------------- syz_fuse/135 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE0:SE1] is trying to acquire: 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: spin_lock include/linux/spinlock.h:338 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1751 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x203/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 and this task is already holding: 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: spin_lock_irq include/linux/spinlock.h:363 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1749 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x1f4/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 which would create a new lock dependency: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} -> (&fiq->waitq){+.+.} but this new dependency connects a SOFTIRQ-irq-safe lock: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} [...] Reported-by: syzbot+af05535bb79520f95431@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Reported-by: syzbot+d86c4426a01f60feddc7@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Fixes: bfe4037e722e ("aio: implement IOCB_CMD_POLL") Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v4.19+ Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2019-09-08 20:15:18 -07:00
fuse: fix deadlock with aio poll and fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock When IOCB_CMD_POLL is used on the FUSE device, aio_poll() disables IRQs and takes kioctx::ctx_lock, then fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock. This may have to wait for fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock to be released by one of many places that take it with IRQs enabled. Since the IRQ handler may take kioctx::ctx_lock, lockdep reports that a deadlock is possible. Fix it by protecting the state of struct fuse_iqueue with a separate spinlock, and only accessing fuse_iqueue::waitq using the versions of the waitqueue functions which do IRQ-safe locking internally. Reproducer: #include <fcntl.h> #include <stdio.h> #include <sys/mount.h> #include <sys/stat.h> #include <sys/syscall.h> #include <unistd.h> #include <linux/aio_abi.h> int main() { char opts[128]; int fd = open("/dev/fuse", O_RDWR); aio_context_t ctx = 0; struct iocb cb = { .aio_lio_opcode = IOCB_CMD_POLL, .aio_fildes = fd }; struct iocb *cbp = &cb; sprintf(opts, "fd=%d,rootmode=040000,user_id=0,group_id=0", fd); mkdir("mnt", 0700); mount("foo", "mnt", "fuse", 0, opts); syscall(__NR_io_setup, 1, &ctx); syscall(__NR_io_submit, ctx, 1, &cbp); } Beginning of lockdep output: ===================================================== WARNING: SOFTIRQ-safe -> SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order detected 5.3.0-rc5 #9 Not tainted ----------------------------------------------------- syz_fuse/135 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE0:SE1] is trying to acquire: 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: spin_lock include/linux/spinlock.h:338 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1751 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x203/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 and this task is already holding: 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: spin_lock_irq include/linux/spinlock.h:363 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1749 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x1f4/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 which would create a new lock dependency: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} -> (&fiq->waitq){+.+.} but this new dependency connects a SOFTIRQ-irq-safe lock: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} [...] Reported-by: syzbot+af05535bb79520f95431@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Reported-by: syzbot+d86c4426a01f60feddc7@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Fixes: bfe4037e722e ("aio: implement IOCB_CMD_POLL") Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v4.19+ Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2019-09-08 20:15:18 -07:00
fuse: fix deadlock with aio poll and fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock When IOCB_CMD_POLL is used on the FUSE device, aio_poll() disables IRQs and takes kioctx::ctx_lock, then fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock. This may have to wait for fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock to be released by one of many places that take it with IRQs enabled. Since the IRQ handler may take kioctx::ctx_lock, lockdep reports that a deadlock is possible. Fix it by protecting the state of struct fuse_iqueue with a separate spinlock, and only accessing fuse_iqueue::waitq using the versions of the waitqueue functions which do IRQ-safe locking internally. Reproducer: #include <fcntl.h> #include <stdio.h> #include <sys/mount.h> #include <sys/stat.h> #include <sys/syscall.h> #include <unistd.h> #include <linux/aio_abi.h> int main() { char opts[128]; int fd = open("/dev/fuse", O_RDWR); aio_context_t ctx = 0; struct iocb cb = { .aio_lio_opcode = IOCB_CMD_POLL, .aio_fildes = fd }; struct iocb *cbp = &cb; sprintf(opts, "fd=%d,rootmode=040000,user_id=0,group_id=0", fd); mkdir("mnt", 0700); mount("foo", "mnt", "fuse", 0, opts); syscall(__NR_io_setup, 1, &ctx); syscall(__NR_io_submit, ctx, 1, &cbp); } Beginning of lockdep output: ===================================================== WARNING: SOFTIRQ-safe -> SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order detected 5.3.0-rc5 #9 Not tainted ----------------------------------------------------- syz_fuse/135 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE0:SE1] is trying to acquire: 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: spin_lock include/linux/spinlock.h:338 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1751 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x203/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 and this task is already holding: 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: spin_lock_irq include/linux/spinlock.h:363 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1749 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x1f4/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 which would create a new lock dependency: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} -> (&fiq->waitq){+.+.} but this new dependency connects a SOFTIRQ-irq-safe lock: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} [...] Reported-by: syzbot+af05535bb79520f95431@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Reported-by: syzbot+d86c4426a01f60feddc7@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Fixes: bfe4037e722e ("aio: implement IOCB_CMD_POLL") Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v4.19+ Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2019-09-08 20:15:18 -07:00
fuse: fix deadlock with aio poll and fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock When IOCB_CMD_POLL is used on the FUSE device, aio_poll() disables IRQs and takes kioctx::ctx_lock, then fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock. This may have to wait for fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock to be released by one of many places that take it with IRQs enabled. Since the IRQ handler may take kioctx::ctx_lock, lockdep reports that a deadlock is possible. Fix it by protecting the state of struct fuse_iqueue with a separate spinlock, and only accessing fuse_iqueue::waitq using the versions of the waitqueue functions which do IRQ-safe locking internally. Reproducer: #include <fcntl.h> #include <stdio.h> #include <sys/mount.h> #include <sys/stat.h> #include <sys/syscall.h> #include <unistd.h> #include <linux/aio_abi.h> int main() { char opts[128]; int fd = open("/dev/fuse", O_RDWR); aio_context_t ctx = 0; struct iocb cb = { .aio_lio_opcode = IOCB_CMD_POLL, .aio_fildes = fd }; struct iocb *cbp = &cb; sprintf(opts, "fd=%d,rootmode=040000,user_id=0,group_id=0", fd); mkdir("mnt", 0700); mount("foo", "mnt", "fuse", 0, opts); syscall(__NR_io_setup, 1, &ctx); syscall(__NR_io_submit, ctx, 1, &cbp); } Beginning of lockdep output: ===================================================== WARNING: SOFTIRQ-safe -> SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order detected 5.3.0-rc5 #9 Not tainted ----------------------------------------------------- syz_fuse/135 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE0:SE1] is trying to acquire: 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: spin_lock include/linux/spinlock.h:338 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1751 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x203/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 and this task is already holding: 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: spin_lock_irq include/linux/spinlock.h:363 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1749 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x1f4/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 which would create a new lock dependency: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} -> (&fiq->waitq){+.+.} but this new dependency connects a SOFTIRQ-irq-safe lock: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} [...] Reported-by: syzbot+af05535bb79520f95431@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Reported-by: syzbot+d86c4426a01f60feddc7@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Fixes: bfe4037e722e ("aio: implement IOCB_CMD_POLL") Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v4.19+ Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2019-09-08 20:15:18 -07:00
fuse: fix deadlock with aio poll and fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock When IOCB_CMD_POLL is used on the FUSE device, aio_poll() disables IRQs and takes kioctx::ctx_lock, then fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock. This may have to wait for fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock to be released by one of many places that take it with IRQs enabled. Since the IRQ handler may take kioctx::ctx_lock, lockdep reports that a deadlock is possible. Fix it by protecting the state of struct fuse_iqueue with a separate spinlock, and only accessing fuse_iqueue::waitq using the versions of the waitqueue functions which do IRQ-safe locking internally. Reproducer: #include <fcntl.h> #include <stdio.h> #include <sys/mount.h> #include <sys/stat.h> #include <sys/syscall.h> #include <unistd.h> #include <linux/aio_abi.h> int main() { char opts[128]; int fd = open("/dev/fuse", O_RDWR); aio_context_t ctx = 0; struct iocb cb = { .aio_lio_opcode = IOCB_CMD_POLL, .aio_fildes = fd }; struct iocb *cbp = &cb; sprintf(opts, "fd=%d,rootmode=040000,user_id=0,group_id=0", fd); mkdir("mnt", 0700); mount("foo", "mnt", "fuse", 0, opts); syscall(__NR_io_setup, 1, &ctx); syscall(__NR_io_submit, ctx, 1, &cbp); } Beginning of lockdep output: ===================================================== WARNING: SOFTIRQ-safe -> SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order detected 5.3.0-rc5 #9 Not tainted ----------------------------------------------------- syz_fuse/135 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE0:SE1] is trying to acquire: 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: spin_lock include/linux/spinlock.h:338 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1751 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x203/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 and this task is already holding: 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: spin_lock_irq include/linux/spinlock.h:363 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1749 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x1f4/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 which would create a new lock dependency: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} -> (&fiq->waitq){+.+.} but this new dependency connects a SOFTIRQ-irq-safe lock: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} [...] Reported-by: syzbot+af05535bb79520f95431@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Reported-by: syzbot+d86c4426a01f60feddc7@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Fixes: bfe4037e722e ("aio: implement IOCB_CMD_POLL") Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v4.19+ Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2019-09-08 20:15:18 -07:00
fuse: fix deadlock with aio poll and fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock When IOCB_CMD_POLL is used on the FUSE device, aio_poll() disables IRQs and takes kioctx::ctx_lock, then fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock. This may have to wait for fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock to be released by one of many places that take it with IRQs enabled. Since the IRQ handler may take kioctx::ctx_lock, lockdep reports that a deadlock is possible. Fix it by protecting the state of struct fuse_iqueue with a separate spinlock, and only accessing fuse_iqueue::waitq using the versions of the waitqueue functions which do IRQ-safe locking internally. Reproducer: #include <fcntl.h> #include <stdio.h> #include <sys/mount.h> #include <sys/stat.h> #include <sys/syscall.h> #include <unistd.h> #include <linux/aio_abi.h> int main() { char opts[128]; int fd = open("/dev/fuse", O_RDWR); aio_context_t ctx = 0; struct iocb cb = { .aio_lio_opcode = IOCB_CMD_POLL, .aio_fildes = fd }; struct iocb *cbp = &cb; sprintf(opts, "fd=%d,rootmode=040000,user_id=0,group_id=0", fd); mkdir("mnt", 0700); mount("foo", "mnt", "fuse", 0, opts); syscall(__NR_io_setup, 1, &ctx); syscall(__NR_io_submit, ctx, 1, &cbp); } Beginning of lockdep output: ===================================================== WARNING: SOFTIRQ-safe -> SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order detected 5.3.0-rc5 #9 Not tainted ----------------------------------------------------- syz_fuse/135 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE0:SE1] is trying to acquire: 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: spin_lock include/linux/spinlock.h:338 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1751 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x203/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 and this task is already holding: 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: spin_lock_irq include/linux/spinlock.h:363 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1749 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x1f4/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 which would create a new lock dependency: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} -> (&fiq->waitq){+.+.} but this new dependency connects a SOFTIRQ-irq-safe lock: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} [...] Reported-by: syzbot+af05535bb79520f95431@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Reported-by: syzbot+d86c4426a01f60feddc7@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Fixes: bfe4037e722e ("aio: implement IOCB_CMD_POLL") Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v4.19+ Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2019-09-08 20:15:18 -07:00
fuse: fix deadlock with aio poll and fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock When IOCB_CMD_POLL is used on the FUSE device, aio_poll() disables IRQs and takes kioctx::ctx_lock, then fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock. This may have to wait for fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock to be released by one of many places that take it with IRQs enabled. Since the IRQ handler may take kioctx::ctx_lock, lockdep reports that a deadlock is possible. Fix it by protecting the state of struct fuse_iqueue with a separate spinlock, and only accessing fuse_iqueue::waitq using the versions of the waitqueue functions which do IRQ-safe locking internally. Reproducer: #include <fcntl.h> #include <stdio.h> #include <sys/mount.h> #include <sys/stat.h> #include <sys/syscall.h> #include <unistd.h> #include <linux/aio_abi.h> int main() { char opts[128]; int fd = open("/dev/fuse", O_RDWR); aio_context_t ctx = 0; struct iocb cb = { .aio_lio_opcode = IOCB_CMD_POLL, .aio_fildes = fd }; struct iocb *cbp = &cb; sprintf(opts, "fd=%d,rootmode=040000,user_id=0,group_id=0", fd); mkdir("mnt", 0700); mount("foo", "mnt", "fuse", 0, opts); syscall(__NR_io_setup, 1, &ctx); syscall(__NR_io_submit, ctx, 1, &cbp); } Beginning of lockdep output: ===================================================== WARNING: SOFTIRQ-safe -> SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order detected 5.3.0-rc5 #9 Not tainted ----------------------------------------------------- syz_fuse/135 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE0:SE1] is trying to acquire: 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: spin_lock include/linux/spinlock.h:338 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1751 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x203/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 and this task is already holding: 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: spin_lock_irq include/linux/spinlock.h:363 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1749 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x1f4/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 which would create a new lock dependency: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} -> (&fiq->waitq){+.+.} but this new dependency connects a SOFTIRQ-irq-safe lock: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} [...] Reported-by: syzbot+af05535bb79520f95431@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Reported-by: syzbot+d86c4426a01f60feddc7@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Fixes: bfe4037e722e ("aio: implement IOCB_CMD_POLL") Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v4.19+ Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2019-09-08 20:15:18 -07:00
fuse: require /dev/fuse reads to have enough buffer capacity (take 2) [ This retries commit d4b13963f217 ("fuse: require /dev/fuse reads to have enough buffer capacity"), which was reverted. In this version we require only `sizeof(fuse_in_header) + sizeof(fuse_write_in)` instead of 4K for FUSE request header room, because, contrary to libfuse and kernel client behaviour, GlusterFS actually provides only so much room for request header. ] A FUSE filesystem server queues /dev/fuse sys_read calls to get filesystem requests to handle. It does not know in advance what would be that request as it can be anything that client issues - LOOKUP, READ, WRITE, ... Many requests are short and retrieve data from the filesystem. However WRITE and NOTIFY_REPLY write data into filesystem. Before getting into operation phase, FUSE filesystem server and kernel client negotiate what should be the maximum write size the client will ever issue. After negotiation the contract in between server/client is that the filesystem server then should queue /dev/fuse sys_read calls with enough buffer capacity to receive any client request - WRITE in particular, while FUSE client should not, in particular, send WRITE requests with > negotiated max_write payload. FUSE client in kernel and libfuse historically reserve 4K for request header. However an existing filesystem server - GlusterFS - was found which reserves only 80 bytes for header room (= `sizeof(fuse_in_header) + sizeof(fuse_write_in)`). Since `sizeof(fuse_in_header) + sizeof(fuse_write_in)` == `sizeof(fuse_in_header) + sizeof(fuse_read_in)` == `sizeof(fuse_in_header) + sizeof(fuse_notify_retrieve_in)` is the absolute minimum any sane filesystem should be using for header room, the contract is that filesystem server should queue sys_reads with `sizeof(fuse_in_header) + sizeof(fuse_write_in)` + max_write buffer. If the filesystem server does not follow this contract, what can happen is that fuse_dev_do_read will see that request size is > buffer size, and then it will return EIO to client who issued the request but won't indicate in any way that there is a problem to filesystem server. This can be hard to diagnose because for some requests, e.g. for NOTIFY_REPLY which mimics WRITE, there is no client thread that is waiting for request completion and that EIO goes nowhere, while on filesystem server side things look like the kernel is not replying back after successful NOTIFY_RETRIEVE request made by the server. We can make the problem easy to diagnose if we indicate via error return to filesystem server when it is violating the contract. This should not practically cause problems because if a filesystem server is using shorter buffer, writes to it were already very likely to cause EIO, and if the filesystem is read-only it should be too following FUSE_MIN_READ_BUFFER minimum buffer size. Please see [1] for context where the problem of stuck filesystem was hit for real (because kernel client was incorrectly sending more than max_write data with NOTIFY_REPLY; see also previous patch), how the situation was traced and for more involving patch that did not make it into the tree. [1] https://marc.info/?l=linux-fsdevel&m=155057023600853&w=2 Signed-off-by: Kirill Smelkov <kirr@nexedi.com> Tested-by: Sander Eikelenboom <linux@eikelenboom.it> Cc: Han-Wen Nienhuys <hanwen@google.com> Cc: Jakob Unterwurzacher <jakobunt@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2019-07-08 17:03:31 +00:00
fuse: fix deadlock with aio poll and fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock When IOCB_CMD_POLL is used on the FUSE device, aio_poll() disables IRQs and takes kioctx::ctx_lock, then fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock. This may have to wait for fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock to be released by one of many places that take it with IRQs enabled. Since the IRQ handler may take kioctx::ctx_lock, lockdep reports that a deadlock is possible. Fix it by protecting the state of struct fuse_iqueue with a separate spinlock, and only accessing fuse_iqueue::waitq using the versions of the waitqueue functions which do IRQ-safe locking internally. Reproducer: #include <fcntl.h> #include <stdio.h> #include <sys/mount.h> #include <sys/stat.h> #include <sys/syscall.h> #include <unistd.h> #include <linux/aio_abi.h> int main() { char opts[128]; int fd = open("/dev/fuse", O_RDWR); aio_context_t ctx = 0; struct iocb cb = { .aio_lio_opcode = IOCB_CMD_POLL, .aio_fildes = fd }; struct iocb *cbp = &cb; sprintf(opts, "fd=%d,rootmode=040000,user_id=0,group_id=0", fd); mkdir("mnt", 0700); mount("foo", "mnt", "fuse", 0, opts); syscall(__NR_io_setup, 1, &ctx); syscall(__NR_io_submit, ctx, 1, &cbp); } Beginning of lockdep output: ===================================================== WARNING: SOFTIRQ-safe -> SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order detected 5.3.0-rc5 #9 Not tainted ----------------------------------------------------- syz_fuse/135 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE0:SE1] is trying to acquire: 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: spin_lock include/linux/spinlock.h:338 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1751 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x203/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 and this task is already holding: 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: spin_lock_irq include/linux/spinlock.h:363 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1749 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x1f4/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 which would create a new lock dependency: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} -> (&fiq->waitq){+.+.} but this new dependency connects a SOFTIRQ-irq-safe lock: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} [...] Reported-by: syzbot+af05535bb79520f95431@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Reported-by: syzbot+d86c4426a01f60feddc7@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Fixes: bfe4037e722e ("aio: implement IOCB_CMD_POLL") Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v4.19+ Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2019-09-08 20:15:18 -07:00
fuse: fix deadlock with aio poll and fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock When IOCB_CMD_POLL is used on the FUSE device, aio_poll() disables IRQs and takes kioctx::ctx_lock, then fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock. This may have to wait for fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock to be released by one of many places that take it with IRQs enabled. Since the IRQ handler may take kioctx::ctx_lock, lockdep reports that a deadlock is possible. Fix it by protecting the state of struct fuse_iqueue with a separate spinlock, and only accessing fuse_iqueue::waitq using the versions of the waitqueue functions which do IRQ-safe locking internally. Reproducer: #include <fcntl.h> #include <stdio.h> #include <sys/mount.h> #include <sys/stat.h> #include <sys/syscall.h> #include <unistd.h> #include <linux/aio_abi.h> int main() { char opts[128]; int fd = open("/dev/fuse", O_RDWR); aio_context_t ctx = 0; struct iocb cb = { .aio_lio_opcode = IOCB_CMD_POLL, .aio_fildes = fd }; struct iocb *cbp = &cb; sprintf(opts, "fd=%d,rootmode=040000,user_id=0,group_id=0", fd); mkdir("mnt", 0700); mount("foo", "mnt", "fuse", 0, opts); syscall(__NR_io_setup, 1, &ctx); syscall(__NR_io_submit, ctx, 1, &cbp); } Beginning of lockdep output: ===================================================== WARNING: SOFTIRQ-safe -> SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order detected 5.3.0-rc5 #9 Not tainted ----------------------------------------------------- syz_fuse/135 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE0:SE1] is trying to acquire: 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: spin_lock include/linux/spinlock.h:338 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1751 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x203/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 and this task is already holding: 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: spin_lock_irq include/linux/spinlock.h:363 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1749 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x1f4/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 which would create a new lock dependency: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} -> (&fiq->waitq){+.+.} but this new dependency connects a SOFTIRQ-irq-safe lock: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} [...] Reported-by: syzbot+af05535bb79520f95431@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Reported-by: syzbot+d86c4426a01f60feddc7@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Fixes: bfe4037e722e ("aio: implement IOCB_CMD_POLL") Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v4.19+ Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2019-09-08 20:15:18 -07:00
fuse: fix deadlock with aio poll and fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock When IOCB_CMD_POLL is used on the FUSE device, aio_poll() disables IRQs and takes kioctx::ctx_lock, then fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock. This may have to wait for fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock to be released by one of many places that take it with IRQs enabled. Since the IRQ handler may take kioctx::ctx_lock, lockdep reports that a deadlock is possible. Fix it by protecting the state of struct fuse_iqueue with a separate spinlock, and only accessing fuse_iqueue::waitq using the versions of the waitqueue functions which do IRQ-safe locking internally. Reproducer: #include <fcntl.h> #include <stdio.h> #include <sys/mount.h> #include <sys/stat.h> #include <sys/syscall.h> #include <unistd.h> #include <linux/aio_abi.h> int main() { char opts[128]; int fd = open("/dev/fuse", O_RDWR); aio_context_t ctx = 0; struct iocb cb = { .aio_lio_opcode = IOCB_CMD_POLL, .aio_fildes = fd }; struct iocb *cbp = &cb; sprintf(opts, "fd=%d,rootmode=040000,user_id=0,group_id=0", fd); mkdir("mnt", 0700); mount("foo", "mnt", "fuse", 0, opts); syscall(__NR_io_setup, 1, &ctx); syscall(__NR_io_submit, ctx, 1, &cbp); } Beginning of lockdep output: ===================================================== WARNING: SOFTIRQ-safe -> SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order detected 5.3.0-rc5 #9 Not tainted ----------------------------------------------------- syz_fuse/135 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE0:SE1] is trying to acquire: 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: spin_lock include/linux/spinlock.h:338 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1751 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x203/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 and this task is already holding: 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: spin_lock_irq include/linux/spinlock.h:363 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1749 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x1f4/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 which would create a new lock dependency: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} -> (&fiq->waitq){+.+.} but this new dependency connects a SOFTIRQ-irq-safe lock: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} [...] Reported-by: syzbot+af05535bb79520f95431@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Reported-by: syzbot+d86c4426a01f60feddc7@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Fixes: bfe4037e722e ("aio: implement IOCB_CMD_POLL") Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v4.19+ Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2019-09-08 20:15:18 -07:00
fuse: fix deadlock with aio poll and fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock When IOCB_CMD_POLL is used on the FUSE device, aio_poll() disables IRQs and takes kioctx::ctx_lock, then fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock. This may have to wait for fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock to be released by one of many places that take it with IRQs enabled. Since the IRQ handler may take kioctx::ctx_lock, lockdep reports that a deadlock is possible. Fix it by protecting the state of struct fuse_iqueue with a separate spinlock, and only accessing fuse_iqueue::waitq using the versions of the waitqueue functions which do IRQ-safe locking internally. Reproducer: #include <fcntl.h> #include <stdio.h> #include <sys/mount.h> #include <sys/stat.h> #include <sys/syscall.h> #include <unistd.h> #include <linux/aio_abi.h> int main() { char opts[128]; int fd = open("/dev/fuse", O_RDWR); aio_context_t ctx = 0; struct iocb cb = { .aio_lio_opcode = IOCB_CMD_POLL, .aio_fildes = fd }; struct iocb *cbp = &cb; sprintf(opts, "fd=%d,rootmode=040000,user_id=0,group_id=0", fd); mkdir("mnt", 0700); mount("foo", "mnt", "fuse", 0, opts); syscall(__NR_io_setup, 1, &ctx); syscall(__NR_io_submit, ctx, 1, &cbp); } Beginning of lockdep output: ===================================================== WARNING: SOFTIRQ-safe -> SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order detected 5.3.0-rc5 #9 Not tainted ----------------------------------------------------- syz_fuse/135 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE0:SE1] is trying to acquire: 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: spin_lock include/linux/spinlock.h:338 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1751 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x203/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 and this task is already holding: 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: spin_lock_irq include/linux/spinlock.h:363 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1749 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x1f4/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 which would create a new lock dependency: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} -> (&fiq->waitq){+.+.} but this new dependency connects a SOFTIRQ-irq-safe lock: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} [...] Reported-by: syzbot+af05535bb79520f95431@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Reported-by: syzbot+d86c4426a01f60feddc7@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Fixes: bfe4037e722e ("aio: implement IOCB_CMD_POLL") Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v4.19+ Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2019-09-08 20:15:18 -07:00
fuse: allow server to run in different pid_ns Commit 0b6e9ea041e6 ("fuse: Add support for pid namespaces") broke Sandstorm.io development tools, which have been sending FUSE file descriptors across PID namespace boundaries since early 2014. The above patch added a check that prevented I/O on the fuse device file descriptor if the pid namespace of the reader/writer was different from the pid namespace of the mounter. With this change passing the device file descriptor to a different pid namespace simply doesn't work. The check was added because pids are transferred to/from the fuse userspace server in the namespace registered at mount time. To fix this regression, remove the checks and do the following: 1) the pid in the request header (the pid of the task that initiated the filesystem operation) is translated to the reader's pid namespace. If a mapping doesn't exist for this pid, then a zero pid is used. Note: even if a mapping would exist between the initiator task's pid namespace and the reader's pid namespace the pid will be zero if either mapping from initator's to mounter's namespace or mapping from mounter's to reader's namespace doesn't exist. 2) The lk.pid value in setlk/setlkw requests and getlk reply is left alone. Userspace should not interpret this value anyway. Also allow the setlk/setlkw operations if the pid of the task cannot be represented in the mounter's namespace (pid being zero in that case). Reported-by: Kenton Varda <kenton@sandstorm.io> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com> Fixes: 0b6e9ea041e6 ("fuse: Add support for pid namespaces") Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v4.12+ Cc: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com> Cc: Seth Forshee <seth.forshee@canonical.com>
2017-09-12 16:57:53 +02:00
fuse: fix deadlock with aio poll and fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock When IOCB_CMD_POLL is used on the FUSE device, aio_poll() disables IRQs and takes kioctx::ctx_lock, then fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock. This may have to wait for fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock to be released by one of many places that take it with IRQs enabled. Since the IRQ handler may take kioctx::ctx_lock, lockdep reports that a deadlock is possible. Fix it by protecting the state of struct fuse_iqueue with a separate spinlock, and only accessing fuse_iqueue::waitq using the versions of the waitqueue functions which do IRQ-safe locking internally. Reproducer: #include <fcntl.h> #include <stdio.h> #include <sys/mount.h> #include <sys/stat.h> #include <sys/syscall.h> #include <unistd.h> #include <linux/aio_abi.h> int main() { char opts[128]; int fd = open("/dev/fuse", O_RDWR); aio_context_t ctx = 0; struct iocb cb = { .aio_lio_opcode = IOCB_CMD_POLL, .aio_fildes = fd }; struct iocb *cbp = &cb; sprintf(opts, "fd=%d,rootmode=040000,user_id=0,group_id=0", fd); mkdir("mnt", 0700); mount("foo", "mnt", "fuse", 0, opts); syscall(__NR_io_setup, 1, &ctx); syscall(__NR_io_submit, ctx, 1, &cbp); } Beginning of lockdep output: ===================================================== WARNING: SOFTIRQ-safe -> SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order detected 5.3.0-rc5 #9 Not tainted ----------------------------------------------------- syz_fuse/135 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE0:SE1] is trying to acquire: 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: spin_lock include/linux/spinlock.h:338 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1751 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x203/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 and this task is already holding: 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: spin_lock_irq include/linux/spinlock.h:363 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1749 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x1f4/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 which would create a new lock dependency: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} -> (&fiq->waitq){+.+.} but this new dependency connects a SOFTIRQ-irq-safe lock: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} [...] Reported-by: syzbot+af05535bb79520f95431@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Reported-by: syzbot+d86c4426a01f60feddc7@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Fixes: bfe4037e722e ("aio: implement IOCB_CMD_POLL") Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v4.19+ Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2019-09-08 20:15:18 -07:00
fuse: explicitly set /dev/fuse file's private_data The misc subsystem (which is used for /dev/fuse) initializes private_data to point to the misc device when a driver has registered a custom open file operation, and initializes it to NULL when a custom open file operation has *not* been provided. This subtle quirk is confusing, to the point where kernel code registers *empty* file open operations to have private_data point to the misc device structure. And it leads to bugs, where the addition or removal of a custom open file operation surprisingly changes the initial contents of a file's private_data structure. So to simplify things in the misc subsystem, a patch [1] has been proposed to *always* set the private_data to point to the misc device, instead of only doing this when a custom open file operation has been registered. But before this patch can be applied we need to modify drivers that make the assumption that a misc device file's private_data is initialized to NULL because they didn't register a custom open file operation, so they don't rely on this assumption anymore. FUSE uses private_data to store the fuse_conn and errors out if this is not initialized to NULL at mount time. Hence, we now set a file's private_data to NULL explicitly, to be independent of whatever value the misc subsystem initializes it to by default. [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/12/4/939 Reported-by: Giedrius Statkevicius <giedriuswork@gmail.com> Reported-by: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Tom Van Braeckel <tomvanbraeckel@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
2015-01-12 05:22:16 +01:00
mm, fs: get rid of PAGE_CACHE_* and page_cache_{get,release} macros PAGE_CACHE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN} macros were introduced *long* time ago with promise that one day it will be possible to implement page cache with bigger chunks than PAGE_SIZE. This promise never materialized. And unlikely will. We have many places where PAGE_CACHE_SIZE assumed to be equal to PAGE_SIZE. And it's constant source of confusion on whether PAGE_CACHE_* or PAGE_* constant should be used in a particular case, especially on the border between fs and mm. Global switching to PAGE_CACHE_SIZE != PAGE_SIZE would cause to much breakage to be doable. Let's stop pretending that pages in page cache are special. They are not. The changes are pretty straight-forward: - <foo> << (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) -> <foo>; - <foo> >> (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) -> <foo>; - PAGE_CACHE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN} -> PAGE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN}; - page_cache_get() -> get_page(); - page_cache_release() -> put_page(); This patch contains automated changes generated with coccinelle using script below. For some reason, coccinelle doesn't patch header files. I've called spatch for them manually. The only adjustment after coccinelle is revert of changes to PAGE_CAHCE_ALIGN definition: we are going to drop it later. There are few places in the code where coccinelle didn't reach. I'll fix them manually in a separate patch. Comments and documentation also will be addressed with the separate patch. virtual patch @@ expression E; @@ - E << (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) + E @@ expression E; @@ - E >> (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) + E @@ @@ - PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT + PAGE_SHIFT @@ @@ - PAGE_CACHE_SIZE + PAGE_SIZE @@ @@ - PAGE_CACHE_MASK + PAGE_MASK @@ expression E; @@ - PAGE_CACHE_ALIGN(E) + PAGE_ALIGN(E) @@ expression E; @@ - page_cache_get(E) + get_page(E) @@ expression E; @@ - page_cache_release(E) + put_page(E) Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-04-01 15:29:47 +03:00
FUSE: Notifying the kernel of deletion. Allows a FUSE file-system to tell the kernel when a file or directory is deleted. If the specified dentry has the specified inode number, the kernel will unhash it. The current 'fuse_notify_inval_entry' does not cause the kernel to clean up directories that are in use properly, and as a result the users of those directories see incorrect semantics from the file-system. The error condition seen when 'fuse_notify_inval_entry' is used to notify of a deleted directory is avoided when 'fuse_notify_delete' is used instead. The following scenario demonstrates the difference: 1. User A chdirs into 'testdir' and starts reading 'testfile'. 2. User B rm -rf 'testdir'. 3. User B creates 'testdir'. 4. User C chdirs into 'testdir'. If you run the above within the same machine on any file-system (including fuse file-systems), there is no problem: user C is able to chdir into the new testdir. The old testdir is removed from the dentry tree, but still open by user A. If operations 2 and 3 are performed via the network such that the fuse file-system uses one of the notify functions to tell the kernel that the nodes are gone, then the following error occurs for user C while user A holds the original directory open: muirj@empacher:~> ls /test/testdir ls: cannot access /test/testdir: No such file or directory The issue here is that the kernel still has a dentry for testdir, and so it is requesting the attributes for the old directory, while the file-system is responding that the directory no longer exists. If on the other hand, if the file-system can notify the kernel that the directory is deleted using the new 'fuse_notify_delete' function, then the above ls will find the new directory as expected. Signed-off-by: John Muir <john@jmuir.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
2011-12-06 21:50:06 +01:00
mm, fs: get rid of PAGE_CACHE_* and page_cache_{get,release} macros PAGE_CACHE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN} macros were introduced *long* time ago with promise that one day it will be possible to implement page cache with bigger chunks than PAGE_SIZE. This promise never materialized. And unlikely will. We have many places where PAGE_CACHE_SIZE assumed to be equal to PAGE_SIZE. And it's constant source of confusion on whether PAGE_CACHE_* or PAGE_* constant should be used in a particular case, especially on the border between fs and mm. Global switching to PAGE_CACHE_SIZE != PAGE_SIZE would cause to much breakage to be doable. Let's stop pretending that pages in page cache are special. They are not. The changes are pretty straight-forward: - <foo> << (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) -> <foo>; - <foo> >> (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) -> <foo>; - PAGE_CACHE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN} -> PAGE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN}; - page_cache_get() -> get_page(); - page_cache_release() -> put_page(); This patch contains automated changes generated with coccinelle using script below. For some reason, coccinelle doesn't patch header files. I've called spatch for them manually. The only adjustment after coccinelle is revert of changes to PAGE_CAHCE_ALIGN definition: we are going to drop it later. There are few places in the code where coccinelle didn't reach. I'll fix them manually in a separate patch. Comments and documentation also will be addressed with the separate patch. virtual patch @@ expression E; @@ - E << (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) + E @@ expression E; @@ - E >> (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) + E @@ @@ - PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT + PAGE_SHIFT @@ @@ - PAGE_CACHE_SIZE + PAGE_SIZE @@ @@ - PAGE_CACHE_MASK + PAGE_MASK @@ expression E; @@ - PAGE_CACHE_ALIGN(E) + PAGE_ALIGN(E) @@ expression E; @@ - page_cache_get(E) + get_page(E) @@ expression E; @@ - page_cache_release(E) + put_page(E) Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-04-01 15:29:47 +03:00
mm, fs: get rid of PAGE_CACHE_* and page_cache_{get,release} macros PAGE_CACHE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN} macros were introduced *long* time ago with promise that one day it will be possible to implement page cache with bigger chunks than PAGE_SIZE. This promise never materialized. And unlikely will. We have many places where PAGE_CACHE_SIZE assumed to be equal to PAGE_SIZE. And it's constant source of confusion on whether PAGE_CACHE_* or PAGE_* constant should be used in a particular case, especially on the border between fs and mm. Global switching to PAGE_CACHE_SIZE != PAGE_SIZE would cause to much breakage to be doable. Let's stop pretending that pages in page cache are special. They are not. The changes are pretty straight-forward: - <foo> << (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) -> <foo>; - <foo> >> (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) -> <foo>; - PAGE_CACHE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN} -> PAGE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN}; - page_cache_get() -> get_page(); - page_cache_release() -> put_page(); This patch contains automated changes generated with coccinelle using script below. For some reason, coccinelle doesn't patch header files. I've called spatch for them manually. The only adjustment after coccinelle is revert of changes to PAGE_CAHCE_ALIGN definition: we are going to drop it later. There are few places in the code where coccinelle didn't reach. I'll fix them manually in a separate patch. Comments and documentation also will be addressed with the separate patch. virtual patch @@ expression E; @@ - E << (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) + E @@ expression E; @@ - E >> (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) + E @@ @@ - PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT + PAGE_SHIFT @@ @@ - PAGE_CACHE_SIZE + PAGE_SIZE @@ @@ - PAGE_CACHE_MASK + PAGE_MASK @@ expression E; @@ - PAGE_CACHE_ALIGN(E) + PAGE_ALIGN(E) @@ expression E; @@ - page_cache_get(E) + get_page(E) @@ expression E; @@ - page_cache_release(E) + put_page(E) Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-04-01 15:29:47 +03:00
fuse: retrieve: cap requested size to negotiated max_write FUSE filesystem server and kernel client negotiate during initialization phase, what should be the maximum write size the client will ever issue. Correspondingly the filesystem server then queues sys_read calls to read requests with buffer capacity large enough to carry request header + that max_write bytes. A filesystem server is free to set its max_write in anywhere in the range between [1*page, fc->max_pages*page]. In particular go-fuse[2] sets max_write by default as 64K, wheres default fc->max_pages corresponds to 128K. Libfuse also allows users to configure max_write, but by default presets it to possible maximum. If max_write is < fc->max_pages*page, and in NOTIFY_RETRIEVE handler we allow to retrieve more than max_write bytes, corresponding prepared NOTIFY_REPLY will be thrown away by fuse_dev_do_read, because the filesystem server, in full correspondence with server/client contract, will be only queuing sys_read with ~max_write buffer capacity, and fuse_dev_do_read throws away requests that cannot fit into server request buffer. In turn the filesystem server could get stuck waiting indefinitely for NOTIFY_REPLY since NOTIFY_RETRIEVE handler returned OK which is understood by clients as that NOTIFY_REPLY was queued and will be sent back. Cap requested size to negotiate max_write to avoid the problem. This aligns with the way NOTIFY_RETRIEVE handler works, which already unconditionally caps requested retrieve size to fuse_conn->max_pages. This way it should not hurt NOTIFY_RETRIEVE semantic if we return less data than was originally requested. Please see [1] for context where the problem of stuck filesystem was hit for real, how the situation was traced and for more involving patch that did not make it into the tree. [1] https://marc.info/?l=linux-fsdevel&m=155057023600853&w=2 [2] https://github.com/hanwen/go-fuse Signed-off-by: Kirill Smelkov <kirr@nexedi.com> Cc: Han-Wen Nienhuys <hanwen@google.com> Cc: Jakob Unterwurzacher <jakobunt@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2019-03-27 10:15:19 +00:00
fuse: add max_pages to init_out Replace FUSE_MAX_PAGES_PER_REQ with the configurable parameter max_pages to improve performance. Old RFC with detailed description of the problem and many fixes by Mitsuo Hayasaka (mitsuo.hayasaka.hu@hitachi.com): - https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/7/5/136 We've encountered performance degradation and fixed it on a big and complex virtual environment. Environment to reproduce degradation and improvement: 1. Add lag to user mode FUSE Add nanosleep(&(struct timespec){ 0, 1000 }, NULL); to xmp_write_buf in passthrough_fh.c 2. patch UM fuse with configurable max_pages parameter. The patch will be provided latter. 3. run test script and perform test on tmpfs fuse_test() { cd /tmp mkdir -p fusemnt passthrough_fh -o max_pages=$1 /tmp/fusemnt grep fuse /proc/self/mounts dd conv=fdatasync oflag=dsync if=/dev/zero of=fusemnt/tmp/tmp \ count=1K bs=1M 2>&1 | grep -v records rm fusemnt/tmp/tmp killall passthrough_fh } Test results: passthrough_fh /tmp/fusemnt fuse.passthrough_fh \ rw,nosuid,nodev,relatime,user_id=0,group_id=0 0 0 1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 1.73867 s, 618 MB/s passthrough_fh /tmp/fusemnt fuse.passthrough_fh \ rw,nosuid,nodev,relatime,user_id=0,group_id=0,max_pages=256 0 0 1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 1.15643 s, 928 MB/s Obviously with bigger lag the difference between 'before' and 'after' will be more significant. Mitsuo Hayasaka, in 2012 (https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/7/5/136), observed improvement from 400-550 to 520-740. Signed-off-by: Constantine Shulyupin <const@MakeLinux.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2018-09-06 15:37:06 +03:00
mm, fs: get rid of PAGE_CACHE_* and page_cache_{get,release} macros PAGE_CACHE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN} macros were introduced *long* time ago with promise that one day it will be possible to implement page cache with bigger chunks than PAGE_SIZE. This promise never materialized. And unlikely will. We have many places where PAGE_CACHE_SIZE assumed to be equal to PAGE_SIZE. And it's constant source of confusion on whether PAGE_CACHE_* or PAGE_* constant should be used in a particular case, especially on the border between fs and mm. Global switching to PAGE_CACHE_SIZE != PAGE_SIZE would cause to much breakage to be doable. Let's stop pretending that pages in page cache are special. They are not. The changes are pretty straight-forward: - <foo> << (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) -> <foo>; - <foo> >> (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) -> <foo>; - PAGE_CACHE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN} -> PAGE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN}; - page_cache_get() -> get_page(); - page_cache_release() -> put_page(); This patch contains automated changes generated with coccinelle using script below. For some reason, coccinelle doesn't patch header files. I've called spatch for them manually. The only adjustment after coccinelle is revert of changes to PAGE_CAHCE_ALIGN definition: we are going to drop it later. There are few places in the code where coccinelle didn't reach. I'll fix them manually in a separate patch. Comments and documentation also will be addressed with the separate patch. virtual patch @@ expression E; @@ - E << (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) + E @@ expression E; @@ - E >> (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) + E @@ @@ - PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT + PAGE_SHIFT @@ @@ - PAGE_CACHE_SIZE + PAGE_SIZE @@ @@ - PAGE_CACHE_MASK + PAGE_MASK @@ expression E; @@ - PAGE_CACHE_ALIGN(E) + PAGE_ALIGN(E) @@ expression E; @@ - page_cache_get(E) + get_page(E) @@ expression E; @@ - page_cache_release(E) + put_page(E) Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-04-01 15:29:47 +03:00
mm, fs: get rid of PAGE_CACHE_* and page_cache_{get,release} macros PAGE_CACHE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN} macros were introduced *long* time ago with promise that one day it will be possible to implement page cache with bigger chunks than PAGE_SIZE. This promise never materialized. And unlikely will. We have many places where PAGE_CACHE_SIZE assumed to be equal to PAGE_SIZE. And it's constant source of confusion on whether PAGE_CACHE_* or PAGE_* constant should be used in a particular case, especially on the border between fs and mm. Global switching to PAGE_CACHE_SIZE != PAGE_SIZE would cause to much breakage to be doable. Let's stop pretending that pages in page cache are special. They are not. The changes are pretty straight-forward: - <foo> << (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) -> <foo>; - <foo> >> (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) -> <foo>; - PAGE_CACHE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN} -> PAGE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN}; - page_cache_get() -> get_page(); - page_cache_release() -> put_page(); This patch contains automated changes generated with coccinelle using script below. For some reason, coccinelle doesn't patch header files. I've called spatch for them manually. The only adjustment after coccinelle is revert of changes to PAGE_CAHCE_ALIGN definition: we are going to drop it later. There are few places in the code where coccinelle didn't reach. I'll fix them manually in a separate patch. Comments and documentation also will be addressed with the separate patch. virtual patch @@ expression E; @@ - E << (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) + E @@ expression E; @@ - E >> (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) + E @@ @@ - PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT + PAGE_SHIFT @@ @@ - PAGE_CACHE_SIZE + PAGE_SIZE @@ @@ - PAGE_CACHE_MASK + PAGE_MASK @@ expression E; @@ - PAGE_CACHE_ALIGN(E) + PAGE_ALIGN(E) @@ expression E; @@ - page_cache_get(E) + get_page(E) @@ expression E; @@ - page_cache_release(E) + put_page(E) Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-04-01 15:29:47 +03:00
fuse: clear FR_SENT when re-adding requests into pending list The following warning was reported by lee bruce: ------------[ cut here ]------------ WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 8264 at fs/fuse/dev.c:300 fuse_request_end+0x685/0x7e0 fs/fuse/dev.c:300 Modules linked in: CPU: 0 PID: 8264 Comm: ab2 Not tainted 6.9.0-rc7 Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996) RIP: 0010:fuse_request_end+0x685/0x7e0 fs/fuse/dev.c:300 ...... Call Trace: <TASK> fuse_dev_do_read.constprop.0+0xd36/0x1dd0 fs/fuse/dev.c:1334 fuse_dev_read+0x166/0x200 fs/fuse/dev.c:1367 call_read_iter include/linux/fs.h:2104 [inline] new_sync_read fs/read_write.c:395 [inline] vfs_read+0x85b/0xba0 fs/read_write.c:476 ksys_read+0x12f/0x260 fs/read_write.c:619 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/common.c:52 [inline] do_syscall_64+0xce/0x260 arch/x86/entry/common.c:83 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f ...... </TASK> The warning is due to the FUSE_NOTIFY_RESEND notify sent by the write() syscall in the reproducer program and it happens as follows: (1) calls fuse_dev_read() to read the INIT request The read succeeds. During the read, bit FR_SENT will be set on the request. (2) calls fuse_dev_write() to send an USE_NOTIFY_RESEND notify The resend notify will resend all processing requests, so the INIT request is moved from processing list to pending list again. (3) calls fuse_dev_read() with an invalid output address fuse_dev_read() will try to copy the same INIT request to the output address, but it will fail due to the invalid address, so the INIT request is ended and triggers the warning in fuse_request_end(). Fix it by clearing FR_SENT when re-adding requests into pending list. Acked-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com> Reported-by: xingwei lee <xrivendell7@gmail.com> Reported-by: yue sun <samsun1006219@gmail.com> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/58f13e47-4765-fce4-daf4-dffcc5ae2330@huaweicloud.com/T/#m091614e5ea2af403b259e7cea6a49e51b9ee07a7 Fixes: 760eac73f9f6 ("fuse: Introduce a new notification type for resend pending requests") Signed-off-by: Hou Tao <houtao1@huawei.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2024-05-09 20:21:54 +08:00
FUSE: Notifying the kernel of deletion. Allows a FUSE file-system to tell the kernel when a file or directory is deleted. If the specified dentry has the specified inode number, the kernel will unhash it. The current 'fuse_notify_inval_entry' does not cause the kernel to clean up directories that are in use properly, and as a result the users of those directories see incorrect semantics from the file-system. The error condition seen when 'fuse_notify_inval_entry' is used to notify of a deleted directory is avoided when 'fuse_notify_delete' is used instead. The following scenario demonstrates the difference: 1. User A chdirs into 'testdir' and starts reading 'testfile'. 2. User B rm -rf 'testdir'. 3. User B creates 'testdir'. 4. User C chdirs into 'testdir'. If you run the above within the same machine on any file-system (including fuse file-systems), there is no problem: user C is able to chdir into the new testdir. The old testdir is removed from the dentry tree, but still open by user A. If operations 2 and 3 are performed via the network such that the fuse file-system uses one of the notify functions to tell the kernel that the nodes are gone, then the following error occurs for user C while user A holds the original directory open: muirj@empacher:~> ls /test/testdir ls: cannot access /test/testdir: No such file or directory The issue here is that the kernel still has a dentry for testdir, and so it is requesting the attributes for the old directory, while the file-system is responding that the directory no longer exists. If on the other hand, if the file-system can notify the kernel that the directory is deleted using the new 'fuse_notify_delete' function, then the above ls will find the new directory as expected. Signed-off-by: John Muir <john@jmuir.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
2011-12-06 21:50:06 +01:00
fuse: support splice() writing to fuse device Allow userspace filesystem implementation to use splice() to write to the fuse device. The semantics of using splice() are: 1) buffer the message header and data in a temporary pipe 2) with a *single* splice() call move the message from the temporary pipe to the fuse device The READ reply message has the most interesting use for this, since now the data from an arbitrary file descriptor (which could be a regular file, a block device or a socket) can be tranferred into the fuse device without having to go through a userspace buffer. It will also allow zero copy moving of pages. One caveat is that the protocol on the fuse device requires the length of the whole message to be written into the header. But the length of the data transferred into the temporary pipe may not be known in advance. The current library implementation works around this by using vmplice to write the header and modifying the header after splicing the data into the pipe (error handling omitted): struct fuse_out_header out; iov.iov_base = &out; iov.iov_len = sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); vmsplice(pip[1], &iov, 1, 0); len = splice(input_fd, input_offset, pip[1], NULL, len, 0); /* retrospectively modify the header: */ out.len = len + sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); splice(pip[0], NULL, fuse_chan_fd(req->ch), NULL, out.len, flags); This works since vmsplice only saves a pointer to the data, it does not copy the data itself. Since pipes are currently limited to 16 pages and messages need to be spliced atomically, the length of the data is limited to 15 pages (or 60kB for 4k pages). Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
2010-05-25 15:06:06 +02:00
fuse: support splice() writing to fuse device Allow userspace filesystem implementation to use splice() to write to the fuse device. The semantics of using splice() are: 1) buffer the message header and data in a temporary pipe 2) with a *single* splice() call move the message from the temporary pipe to the fuse device The READ reply message has the most interesting use for this, since now the data from an arbitrary file descriptor (which could be a regular file, a block device or a socket) can be tranferred into the fuse device without having to go through a userspace buffer. It will also allow zero copy moving of pages. One caveat is that the protocol on the fuse device requires the length of the whole message to be written into the header. But the length of the data transferred into the temporary pipe may not be known in advance. The current library implementation works around this by using vmplice to write the header and modifying the header after splicing the data into the pipe (error handling omitted): struct fuse_out_header out; iov.iov_base = &out; iov.iov_len = sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); vmsplice(pip[1], &iov, 1, 0); len = splice(input_fd, input_offset, pip[1], NULL, len, 0); /* retrospectively modify the header: */ out.len = len + sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); splice(pip[0], NULL, fuse_chan_fd(req->ch), NULL, out.len, flags); This works since vmsplice only saves a pointer to the data, it does not copy the data itself. Since pipes are currently limited to 16 pages and messages need to be spliced atomically, the length of the data is limited to 15 pages (or 60kB for 4k pages). Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
2010-05-25 15:06:06 +02:00
fuse: support splice() writing to fuse device Allow userspace filesystem implementation to use splice() to write to the fuse device. The semantics of using splice() are: 1) buffer the message header and data in a temporary pipe 2) with a *single* splice() call move the message from the temporary pipe to the fuse device The READ reply message has the most interesting use for this, since now the data from an arbitrary file descriptor (which could be a regular file, a block device or a socket) can be tranferred into the fuse device without having to go through a userspace buffer. It will also allow zero copy moving of pages. One caveat is that the protocol on the fuse device requires the length of the whole message to be written into the header. But the length of the data transferred into the temporary pipe may not be known in advance. The current library implementation works around this by using vmplice to write the header and modifying the header after splicing the data into the pipe (error handling omitted): struct fuse_out_header out; iov.iov_base = &out; iov.iov_len = sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); vmsplice(pip[1], &iov, 1, 0); len = splice(input_fd, input_offset, pip[1], NULL, len, 0); /* retrospectively modify the header: */ out.len = len + sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); splice(pip[0], NULL, fuse_chan_fd(req->ch), NULL, out.len, flags); This works since vmsplice only saves a pointer to the data, it does not copy the data itself. Since pipes are currently limited to 16 pages and messages need to be spliced atomically, the length of the data is limited to 15 pages (or 60kB for 4k pages). Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
2010-05-25 15:06:06 +02:00
fuse: support splice() writing to fuse device Allow userspace filesystem implementation to use splice() to write to the fuse device. The semantics of using splice() are: 1) buffer the message header and data in a temporary pipe 2) with a *single* splice() call move the message from the temporary pipe to the fuse device The READ reply message has the most interesting use for this, since now the data from an arbitrary file descriptor (which could be a regular file, a block device or a socket) can be tranferred into the fuse device without having to go through a userspace buffer. It will also allow zero copy moving of pages. One caveat is that the protocol on the fuse device requires the length of the whole message to be written into the header. But the length of the data transferred into the temporary pipe may not be known in advance. The current library implementation works around this by using vmplice to write the header and modifying the header after splicing the data into the pipe (error handling omitted): struct fuse_out_header out; iov.iov_base = &out; iov.iov_len = sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); vmsplice(pip[1], &iov, 1, 0); len = splice(input_fd, input_offset, pip[1], NULL, len, 0); /* retrospectively modify the header: */ out.len = len + sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); splice(pip[0], NULL, fuse_chan_fd(req->ch), NULL, out.len, flags); This works since vmsplice only saves a pointer to the data, it does not copy the data itself. Since pipes are currently limited to 16 pages and messages need to be spliced atomically, the length of the data is limited to 15 pages (or 60kB for 4k pages). Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
2010-05-25 15:06:06 +02:00
fuse: support splice() writing to fuse device Allow userspace filesystem implementation to use splice() to write to the fuse device. The semantics of using splice() are: 1) buffer the message header and data in a temporary pipe 2) with a *single* splice() call move the message from the temporary pipe to the fuse device The READ reply message has the most interesting use for this, since now the data from an arbitrary file descriptor (which could be a regular file, a block device or a socket) can be tranferred into the fuse device without having to go through a userspace buffer. It will also allow zero copy moving of pages. One caveat is that the protocol on the fuse device requires the length of the whole message to be written into the header. But the length of the data transferred into the temporary pipe may not be known in advance. The current library implementation works around this by using vmplice to write the header and modifying the header after splicing the data into the pipe (error handling omitted): struct fuse_out_header out; iov.iov_base = &out; iov.iov_len = sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); vmsplice(pip[1], &iov, 1, 0); len = splice(input_fd, input_offset, pip[1], NULL, len, 0); /* retrospectively modify the header: */ out.len = len + sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); splice(pip[0], NULL, fuse_chan_fd(req->ch), NULL, out.len, flags); This works since vmsplice only saves a pointer to the data, it does not copy the data itself. Since pipes are currently limited to 16 pages and messages need to be spliced atomically, the length of the data is limited to 15 pages (or 60kB for 4k pages). Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
2010-05-25 15:06:06 +02:00
fuse: support splice() writing to fuse device Allow userspace filesystem implementation to use splice() to write to the fuse device. The semantics of using splice() are: 1) buffer the message header and data in a temporary pipe 2) with a *single* splice() call move the message from the temporary pipe to the fuse device The READ reply message has the most interesting use for this, since now the data from an arbitrary file descriptor (which could be a regular file, a block device or a socket) can be tranferred into the fuse device without having to go through a userspace buffer. It will also allow zero copy moving of pages. One caveat is that the protocol on the fuse device requires the length of the whole message to be written into the header. But the length of the data transferred into the temporary pipe may not be known in advance. The current library implementation works around this by using vmplice to write the header and modifying the header after splicing the data into the pipe (error handling omitted): struct fuse_out_header out; iov.iov_base = &out; iov.iov_len = sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); vmsplice(pip[1], &iov, 1, 0); len = splice(input_fd, input_offset, pip[1], NULL, len, 0); /* retrospectively modify the header: */ out.len = len + sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); splice(pip[0], NULL, fuse_chan_fd(req->ch), NULL, out.len, flags); This works since vmsplice only saves a pointer to the data, it does not copy the data itself. Since pipes are currently limited to 16 pages and messages need to be spliced atomically, the length of the data is limited to 15 pages (or 60kB for 4k pages). Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
2010-05-25 15:06:06 +02:00
fuse: support splice() writing to fuse device Allow userspace filesystem implementation to use splice() to write to the fuse device. The semantics of using splice() are: 1) buffer the message header and data in a temporary pipe 2) with a *single* splice() call move the message from the temporary pipe to the fuse device The READ reply message has the most interesting use for this, since now the data from an arbitrary file descriptor (which could be a regular file, a block device or a socket) can be tranferred into the fuse device without having to go through a userspace buffer. It will also allow zero copy moving of pages. One caveat is that the protocol on the fuse device requires the length of the whole message to be written into the header. But the length of the data transferred into the temporary pipe may not be known in advance. The current library implementation works around this by using vmplice to write the header and modifying the header after splicing the data into the pipe (error handling omitted): struct fuse_out_header out; iov.iov_base = &out; iov.iov_len = sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); vmsplice(pip[1], &iov, 1, 0); len = splice(input_fd, input_offset, pip[1], NULL, len, 0); /* retrospectively modify the header: */ out.len = len + sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); splice(pip[0], NULL, fuse_chan_fd(req->ch), NULL, out.len, flags); This works since vmsplice only saves a pointer to the data, it does not copy the data itself. Since pipes are currently limited to 16 pages and messages need to be spliced atomically, the length of the data is limited to 15 pages (or 60kB for 4k pages). Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
2010-05-25 15:06:06 +02:00
fuse: support splice() writing to fuse device Allow userspace filesystem implementation to use splice() to write to the fuse device. The semantics of using splice() are: 1) buffer the message header and data in a temporary pipe 2) with a *single* splice() call move the message from the temporary pipe to the fuse device The READ reply message has the most interesting use for this, since now the data from an arbitrary file descriptor (which could be a regular file, a block device or a socket) can be tranferred into the fuse device without having to go through a userspace buffer. It will also allow zero copy moving of pages. One caveat is that the protocol on the fuse device requires the length of the whole message to be written into the header. But the length of the data transferred into the temporary pipe may not be known in advance. The current library implementation works around this by using vmplice to write the header and modifying the header after splicing the data into the pipe (error handling omitted): struct fuse_out_header out; iov.iov_base = &out; iov.iov_len = sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); vmsplice(pip[1], &iov, 1, 0); len = splice(input_fd, input_offset, pip[1], NULL, len, 0); /* retrospectively modify the header: */ out.len = len + sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); splice(pip[0], NULL, fuse_chan_fd(req->ch), NULL, out.len, flags); This works since vmsplice only saves a pointer to the data, it does not copy the data itself. Since pipes are currently limited to 16 pages and messages need to be spliced atomically, the length of the data is limited to 15 pages (or 60kB for 4k pages). Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
2010-05-25 15:06:06 +02:00
fuse: support splice() writing to fuse device Allow userspace filesystem implementation to use splice() to write to the fuse device. The semantics of using splice() are: 1) buffer the message header and data in a temporary pipe 2) with a *single* splice() call move the message from the temporary pipe to the fuse device The READ reply message has the most interesting use for this, since now the data from an arbitrary file descriptor (which could be a regular file, a block device or a socket) can be tranferred into the fuse device without having to go through a userspace buffer. It will also allow zero copy moving of pages. One caveat is that the protocol on the fuse device requires the length of the whole message to be written into the header. But the length of the data transferred into the temporary pipe may not be known in advance. The current library implementation works around this by using vmplice to write the header and modifying the header after splicing the data into the pipe (error handling omitted): struct fuse_out_header out; iov.iov_base = &out; iov.iov_len = sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); vmsplice(pip[1], &iov, 1, 0); len = splice(input_fd, input_offset, pip[1], NULL, len, 0); /* retrospectively modify the header: */ out.len = len + sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); splice(pip[0], NULL, fuse_chan_fd(req->ch), NULL, out.len, flags); This works since vmsplice only saves a pointer to the data, it does not copy the data itself. Since pipes are currently limited to 16 pages and messages need to be spliced atomically, the length of the data is limited to 15 pages (or 60kB for 4k pages). Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
2010-05-25 15:06:06 +02:00
fuse: support splice() writing to fuse device Allow userspace filesystem implementation to use splice() to write to the fuse device. The semantics of using splice() are: 1) buffer the message header and data in a temporary pipe 2) with a *single* splice() call move the message from the temporary pipe to the fuse device The READ reply message has the most interesting use for this, since now the data from an arbitrary file descriptor (which could be a regular file, a block device or a socket) can be tranferred into the fuse device without having to go through a userspace buffer. It will also allow zero copy moving of pages. One caveat is that the protocol on the fuse device requires the length of the whole message to be written into the header. But the length of the data transferred into the temporary pipe may not be known in advance. The current library implementation works around this by using vmplice to write the header and modifying the header after splicing the data into the pipe (error handling omitted): struct fuse_out_header out; iov.iov_base = &out; iov.iov_len = sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); vmsplice(pip[1], &iov, 1, 0); len = splice(input_fd, input_offset, pip[1], NULL, len, 0); /* retrospectively modify the header: */ out.len = len + sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); splice(pip[0], NULL, fuse_chan_fd(req->ch), NULL, out.len, flags); This works since vmsplice only saves a pointer to the data, it does not copy the data itself. Since pipes are currently limited to 16 pages and messages need to be spliced atomically, the length of the data is limited to 15 pages (or 60kB for 4k pages). Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
2010-05-25 15:06:06 +02:00
fuse: support splice() writing to fuse device Allow userspace filesystem implementation to use splice() to write to the fuse device. The semantics of using splice() are: 1) buffer the message header and data in a temporary pipe 2) with a *single* splice() call move the message from the temporary pipe to the fuse device The READ reply message has the most interesting use for this, since now the data from an arbitrary file descriptor (which could be a regular file, a block device or a socket) can be tranferred into the fuse device without having to go through a userspace buffer. It will also allow zero copy moving of pages. One caveat is that the protocol on the fuse device requires the length of the whole message to be written into the header. But the length of the data transferred into the temporary pipe may not be known in advance. The current library implementation works around this by using vmplice to write the header and modifying the header after splicing the data into the pipe (error handling omitted): struct fuse_out_header out; iov.iov_base = &out; iov.iov_len = sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); vmsplice(pip[1], &iov, 1, 0); len = splice(input_fd, input_offset, pip[1], NULL, len, 0); /* retrospectively modify the header: */ out.len = len + sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); splice(pip[0], NULL, fuse_chan_fd(req->ch), NULL, out.len, flags); This works since vmsplice only saves a pointer to the data, it does not copy the data itself. Since pipes are currently limited to 16 pages and messages need to be spliced atomically, the length of the data is limited to 15 pages (or 60kB for 4k pages). Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
2010-05-25 15:06:06 +02:00
fuse: support splice() writing to fuse device Allow userspace filesystem implementation to use splice() to write to the fuse device. The semantics of using splice() are: 1) buffer the message header and data in a temporary pipe 2) with a *single* splice() call move the message from the temporary pipe to the fuse device The READ reply message has the most interesting use for this, since now the data from an arbitrary file descriptor (which could be a regular file, a block device or a socket) can be tranferred into the fuse device without having to go through a userspace buffer. It will also allow zero copy moving of pages. One caveat is that the protocol on the fuse device requires the length of the whole message to be written into the header. But the length of the data transferred into the temporary pipe may not be known in advance. The current library implementation works around this by using vmplice to write the header and modifying the header after splicing the data into the pipe (error handling omitted): struct fuse_out_header out; iov.iov_base = &out; iov.iov_len = sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); vmsplice(pip[1], &iov, 1, 0); len = splice(input_fd, input_offset, pip[1], NULL, len, 0); /* retrospectively modify the header: */ out.len = len + sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); splice(pip[0], NULL, fuse_chan_fd(req->ch), NULL, out.len, flags); This works since vmsplice only saves a pointer to the data, it does not copy the data itself. Since pipes are currently limited to 16 pages and messages need to be spliced atomically, the length of the data is limited to 15 pages (or 60kB for 4k pages). Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
2010-05-25 15:06:06 +02:00
fuse: support splice() writing to fuse device Allow userspace filesystem implementation to use splice() to write to the fuse device. The semantics of using splice() are: 1) buffer the message header and data in a temporary pipe 2) with a *single* splice() call move the message from the temporary pipe to the fuse device The READ reply message has the most interesting use for this, since now the data from an arbitrary file descriptor (which could be a regular file, a block device or a socket) can be tranferred into the fuse device without having to go through a userspace buffer. It will also allow zero copy moving of pages. One caveat is that the protocol on the fuse device requires the length of the whole message to be written into the header. But the length of the data transferred into the temporary pipe may not be known in advance. The current library implementation works around this by using vmplice to write the header and modifying the header after splicing the data into the pipe (error handling omitted): struct fuse_out_header out; iov.iov_base = &out; iov.iov_len = sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); vmsplice(pip[1], &iov, 1, 0); len = splice(input_fd, input_offset, pip[1], NULL, len, 0); /* retrospectively modify the header: */ out.len = len + sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); splice(pip[0], NULL, fuse_chan_fd(req->ch), NULL, out.len, flags); This works since vmsplice only saves a pointer to the data, it does not copy the data itself. Since pipes are currently limited to 16 pages and messages need to be spliced atomically, the length of the data is limited to 15 pages (or 60kB for 4k pages). Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
2010-05-25 15:06:06 +02:00
fuse: support splice() writing to fuse device Allow userspace filesystem implementation to use splice() to write to the fuse device. The semantics of using splice() are: 1) buffer the message header and data in a temporary pipe 2) with a *single* splice() call move the message from the temporary pipe to the fuse device The READ reply message has the most interesting use for this, since now the data from an arbitrary file descriptor (which could be a regular file, a block device or a socket) can be tranferred into the fuse device without having to go through a userspace buffer. It will also allow zero copy moving of pages. One caveat is that the protocol on the fuse device requires the length of the whole message to be written into the header. But the length of the data transferred into the temporary pipe may not be known in advance. The current library implementation works around this by using vmplice to write the header and modifying the header after splicing the data into the pipe (error handling omitted): struct fuse_out_header out; iov.iov_base = &out; iov.iov_len = sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); vmsplice(pip[1], &iov, 1, 0); len = splice(input_fd, input_offset, pip[1], NULL, len, 0); /* retrospectively modify the header: */ out.len = len + sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); splice(pip[0], NULL, fuse_chan_fd(req->ch), NULL, out.len, flags); This works since vmsplice only saves a pointer to the data, it does not copy the data itself. Since pipes are currently limited to 16 pages and messages need to be spliced atomically, the length of the data is limited to 15 pages (or 60kB for 4k pages). Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
2010-05-25 15:06:06 +02:00
fuse: support splice() writing to fuse device Allow userspace filesystem implementation to use splice() to write to the fuse device. The semantics of using splice() are: 1) buffer the message header and data in a temporary pipe 2) with a *single* splice() call move the message from the temporary pipe to the fuse device The READ reply message has the most interesting use for this, since now the data from an arbitrary file descriptor (which could be a regular file, a block device or a socket) can be tranferred into the fuse device without having to go through a userspace buffer. It will also allow zero copy moving of pages. One caveat is that the protocol on the fuse device requires the length of the whole message to be written into the header. But the length of the data transferred into the temporary pipe may not be known in advance. The current library implementation works around this by using vmplice to write the header and modifying the header after splicing the data into the pipe (error handling omitted): struct fuse_out_header out; iov.iov_base = &out; iov.iov_len = sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); vmsplice(pip[1], &iov, 1, 0); len = splice(input_fd, input_offset, pip[1], NULL, len, 0); /* retrospectively modify the header: */ out.len = len + sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); splice(pip[0], NULL, fuse_chan_fd(req->ch), NULL, out.len, flags); This works since vmsplice only saves a pointer to the data, it does not copy the data itself. Since pipes are currently limited to 16 pages and messages need to be spliced atomically, the length of the data is limited to 15 pages (or 60kB for 4k pages). Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
2010-05-25 15:06:06 +02:00
fuse: support splice() writing to fuse device Allow userspace filesystem implementation to use splice() to write to the fuse device. The semantics of using splice() are: 1) buffer the message header and data in a temporary pipe 2) with a *single* splice() call move the message from the temporary pipe to the fuse device The READ reply message has the most interesting use for this, since now the data from an arbitrary file descriptor (which could be a regular file, a block device or a socket) can be tranferred into the fuse device without having to go through a userspace buffer. It will also allow zero copy moving of pages. One caveat is that the protocol on the fuse device requires the length of the whole message to be written into the header. But the length of the data transferred into the temporary pipe may not be known in advance. The current library implementation works around this by using vmplice to write the header and modifying the header after splicing the data into the pipe (error handling omitted): struct fuse_out_header out; iov.iov_base = &out; iov.iov_len = sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); vmsplice(pip[1], &iov, 1, 0); len = splice(input_fd, input_offset, pip[1], NULL, len, 0); /* retrospectively modify the header: */ out.len = len + sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); splice(pip[0], NULL, fuse_chan_fd(req->ch), NULL, out.len, flags); This works since vmsplice only saves a pointer to the data, it does not copy the data itself. Since pipes are currently limited to 16 pages and messages need to be spliced atomically, the length of the data is limited to 15 pages (or 60kB for 4k pages). Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
2010-05-25 15:06:06 +02:00
fuse: support splice() writing to fuse device Allow userspace filesystem implementation to use splice() to write to the fuse device. The semantics of using splice() are: 1) buffer the message header and data in a temporary pipe 2) with a *single* splice() call move the message from the temporary pipe to the fuse device The READ reply message has the most interesting use for this, since now the data from an arbitrary file descriptor (which could be a regular file, a block device or a socket) can be tranferred into the fuse device without having to go through a userspace buffer. It will also allow zero copy moving of pages. One caveat is that the protocol on the fuse device requires the length of the whole message to be written into the header. But the length of the data transferred into the temporary pipe may not be known in advance. The current library implementation works around this by using vmplice to write the header and modifying the header after splicing the data into the pipe (error handling omitted): struct fuse_out_header out; iov.iov_base = &out; iov.iov_len = sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); vmsplice(pip[1], &iov, 1, 0); len = splice(input_fd, input_offset, pip[1], NULL, len, 0); /* retrospectively modify the header: */ out.len = len + sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); splice(pip[0], NULL, fuse_chan_fd(req->ch), NULL, out.len, flags); This works since vmsplice only saves a pointer to the data, it does not copy the data itself. Since pipes are currently limited to 16 pages and messages need to be spliced atomically, the length of the data is limited to 15 pages (or 60kB for 4k pages). Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
2010-05-25 15:06:06 +02:00
fuse: support splice() writing to fuse device Allow userspace filesystem implementation to use splice() to write to the fuse device. The semantics of using splice() are: 1) buffer the message header and data in a temporary pipe 2) with a *single* splice() call move the message from the temporary pipe to the fuse device The READ reply message has the most interesting use for this, since now the data from an arbitrary file descriptor (which could be a regular file, a block device or a socket) can be tranferred into the fuse device without having to go through a userspace buffer. It will also allow zero copy moving of pages. One caveat is that the protocol on the fuse device requires the length of the whole message to be written into the header. But the length of the data transferred into the temporary pipe may not be known in advance. The current library implementation works around this by using vmplice to write the header and modifying the header after splicing the data into the pipe (error handling omitted): struct fuse_out_header out; iov.iov_base = &out; iov.iov_len = sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); vmsplice(pip[1], &iov, 1, 0); len = splice(input_fd, input_offset, pip[1], NULL, len, 0); /* retrospectively modify the header: */ out.len = len + sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); splice(pip[0], NULL, fuse_chan_fd(req->ch), NULL, out.len, flags); This works since vmsplice only saves a pointer to the data, it does not copy the data itself. Since pipes are currently limited to 16 pages and messages need to be spliced atomically, the length of the data is limited to 15 pages (or 60kB for 4k pages). Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
2010-05-25 15:06:06 +02:00
fuse: support splice() writing to fuse device Allow userspace filesystem implementation to use splice() to write to the fuse device. The semantics of using splice() are: 1) buffer the message header and data in a temporary pipe 2) with a *single* splice() call move the message from the temporary pipe to the fuse device The READ reply message has the most interesting use for this, since now the data from an arbitrary file descriptor (which could be a regular file, a block device or a socket) can be tranferred into the fuse device without having to go through a userspace buffer. It will also allow zero copy moving of pages. One caveat is that the protocol on the fuse device requires the length of the whole message to be written into the header. But the length of the data transferred into the temporary pipe may not be known in advance. The current library implementation works around this by using vmplice to write the header and modifying the header after splicing the data into the pipe (error handling omitted): struct fuse_out_header out; iov.iov_base = &out; iov.iov_len = sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); vmsplice(pip[1], &iov, 1, 0); len = splice(input_fd, input_offset, pip[1], NULL, len, 0); /* retrospectively modify the header: */ out.len = len + sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); splice(pip[0], NULL, fuse_chan_fd(req->ch), NULL, out.len, flags); This works since vmsplice only saves a pointer to the data, it does not copy the data itself. Since pipes are currently limited to 16 pages and messages need to be spliced atomically, the length of the data is limited to 15 pages (or 60kB for 4k pages). Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
2010-05-25 15:06:06 +02:00
fuse: support splice() writing to fuse device Allow userspace filesystem implementation to use splice() to write to the fuse device. The semantics of using splice() are: 1) buffer the message header and data in a temporary pipe 2) with a *single* splice() call move the message from the temporary pipe to the fuse device The READ reply message has the most interesting use for this, since now the data from an arbitrary file descriptor (which could be a regular file, a block device or a socket) can be tranferred into the fuse device without having to go through a userspace buffer. It will also allow zero copy moving of pages. One caveat is that the protocol on the fuse device requires the length of the whole message to be written into the header. But the length of the data transferred into the temporary pipe may not be known in advance. The current library implementation works around this by using vmplice to write the header and modifying the header after splicing the data into the pipe (error handling omitted): struct fuse_out_header out; iov.iov_base = &out; iov.iov_len = sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); vmsplice(pip[1], &iov, 1, 0); len = splice(input_fd, input_offset, pip[1], NULL, len, 0); /* retrospectively modify the header: */ out.len = len + sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); splice(pip[0], NULL, fuse_chan_fd(req->ch), NULL, out.len, flags); This works since vmsplice only saves a pointer to the data, it does not copy the data itself. Since pipes are currently limited to 16 pages and messages need to be spliced atomically, the length of the data is limited to 15 pages (or 60kB for 4k pages). Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
2010-05-25 15:06:06 +02:00
fuse: support splice() writing to fuse device Allow userspace filesystem implementation to use splice() to write to the fuse device. The semantics of using splice() are: 1) buffer the message header and data in a temporary pipe 2) with a *single* splice() call move the message from the temporary pipe to the fuse device The READ reply message has the most interesting use for this, since now the data from an arbitrary file descriptor (which could be a regular file, a block device or a socket) can be tranferred into the fuse device without having to go through a userspace buffer. It will also allow zero copy moving of pages. One caveat is that the protocol on the fuse device requires the length of the whole message to be written into the header. But the length of the data transferred into the temporary pipe may not be known in advance. The current library implementation works around this by using vmplice to write the header and modifying the header after splicing the data into the pipe (error handling omitted): struct fuse_out_header out; iov.iov_base = &out; iov.iov_len = sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); vmsplice(pip[1], &iov, 1, 0); len = splice(input_fd, input_offset, pip[1], NULL, len, 0); /* retrospectively modify the header: */ out.len = len + sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); splice(pip[0], NULL, fuse_chan_fd(req->ch), NULL, out.len, flags); This works since vmsplice only saves a pointer to the data, it does not copy the data itself. Since pipes are currently limited to 16 pages and messages need to be spliced atomically, the length of the data is limited to 15 pages (or 60kB for 4k pages). Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
2010-05-25 15:06:06 +02:00
fuse: support splice() writing to fuse device Allow userspace filesystem implementation to use splice() to write to the fuse device. The semantics of using splice() are: 1) buffer the message header and data in a temporary pipe 2) with a *single* splice() call move the message from the temporary pipe to the fuse device The READ reply message has the most interesting use for this, since now the data from an arbitrary file descriptor (which could be a regular file, a block device or a socket) can be tranferred into the fuse device without having to go through a userspace buffer. It will also allow zero copy moving of pages. One caveat is that the protocol on the fuse device requires the length of the whole message to be written into the header. But the length of the data transferred into the temporary pipe may not be known in advance. The current library implementation works around this by using vmplice to write the header and modifying the header after splicing the data into the pipe (error handling omitted): struct fuse_out_header out; iov.iov_base = &out; iov.iov_len = sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); vmsplice(pip[1], &iov, 1, 0); len = splice(input_fd, input_offset, pip[1], NULL, len, 0); /* retrospectively modify the header: */ out.len = len + sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); splice(pip[0], NULL, fuse_chan_fd(req->ch), NULL, out.len, flags); This works since vmsplice only saves a pointer to the data, it does not copy the data itself. Since pipes are currently limited to 16 pages and messages need to be spliced atomically, the length of the data is limited to 15 pages (or 60kB for 4k pages). Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
2010-05-25 15:06:06 +02:00
fuse: support splice() writing to fuse device Allow userspace filesystem implementation to use splice() to write to the fuse device. The semantics of using splice() are: 1) buffer the message header and data in a temporary pipe 2) with a *single* splice() call move the message from the temporary pipe to the fuse device The READ reply message has the most interesting use for this, since now the data from an arbitrary file descriptor (which could be a regular file, a block device or a socket) can be tranferred into the fuse device without having to go through a userspace buffer. It will also allow zero copy moving of pages. One caveat is that the protocol on the fuse device requires the length of the whole message to be written into the header. But the length of the data transferred into the temporary pipe may not be known in advance. The current library implementation works around this by using vmplice to write the header and modifying the header after splicing the data into the pipe (error handling omitted): struct fuse_out_header out; iov.iov_base = &out; iov.iov_len = sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); vmsplice(pip[1], &iov, 1, 0); len = splice(input_fd, input_offset, pip[1], NULL, len, 0); /* retrospectively modify the header: */ out.len = len + sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); splice(pip[0], NULL, fuse_chan_fd(req->ch), NULL, out.len, flags); This works since vmsplice only saves a pointer to the data, it does not copy the data itself. Since pipes are currently limited to 16 pages and messages need to be spliced atomically, the length of the data is limited to 15 pages (or 60kB for 4k pages). Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
2010-05-25 15:06:06 +02:00
fuse: support splice() writing to fuse device Allow userspace filesystem implementation to use splice() to write to the fuse device. The semantics of using splice() are: 1) buffer the message header and data in a temporary pipe 2) with a *single* splice() call move the message from the temporary pipe to the fuse device The READ reply message has the most interesting use for this, since now the data from an arbitrary file descriptor (which could be a regular file, a block device or a socket) can be tranferred into the fuse device without having to go through a userspace buffer. It will also allow zero copy moving of pages. One caveat is that the protocol on the fuse device requires the length of the whole message to be written into the header. But the length of the data transferred into the temporary pipe may not be known in advance. The current library implementation works around this by using vmplice to write the header and modifying the header after splicing the data into the pipe (error handling omitted): struct fuse_out_header out; iov.iov_base = &out; iov.iov_len = sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); vmsplice(pip[1], &iov, 1, 0); len = splice(input_fd, input_offset, pip[1], NULL, len, 0); /* retrospectively modify the header: */ out.len = len + sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); splice(pip[0], NULL, fuse_chan_fd(req->ch), NULL, out.len, flags); This works since vmsplice only saves a pointer to the data, it does not copy the data itself. Since pipes are currently limited to 16 pages and messages need to be spliced atomically, the length of the data is limited to 15 pages (or 60kB for 4k pages). Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
2010-05-25 15:06:06 +02:00
fuse: fix deadlock with aio poll and fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock When IOCB_CMD_POLL is used on the FUSE device, aio_poll() disables IRQs and takes kioctx::ctx_lock, then fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock. This may have to wait for fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock to be released by one of many places that take it with IRQs enabled. Since the IRQ handler may take kioctx::ctx_lock, lockdep reports that a deadlock is possible. Fix it by protecting the state of struct fuse_iqueue with a separate spinlock, and only accessing fuse_iqueue::waitq using the versions of the waitqueue functions which do IRQ-safe locking internally. Reproducer: #include <fcntl.h> #include <stdio.h> #include <sys/mount.h> #include <sys/stat.h> #include <sys/syscall.h> #include <unistd.h> #include <linux/aio_abi.h> int main() { char opts[128]; int fd = open("/dev/fuse", O_RDWR); aio_context_t ctx = 0; struct iocb cb = { .aio_lio_opcode = IOCB_CMD_POLL, .aio_fildes = fd }; struct iocb *cbp = &cb; sprintf(opts, "fd=%d,rootmode=040000,user_id=0,group_id=0", fd); mkdir("mnt", 0700); mount("foo", "mnt", "fuse", 0, opts); syscall(__NR_io_setup, 1, &ctx); syscall(__NR_io_submit, ctx, 1, &cbp); } Beginning of lockdep output: ===================================================== WARNING: SOFTIRQ-safe -> SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order detected 5.3.0-rc5 #9 Not tainted ----------------------------------------------------- syz_fuse/135 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE0:SE1] is trying to acquire: 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: spin_lock include/linux/spinlock.h:338 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1751 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x203/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 and this task is already holding: 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: spin_lock_irq include/linux/spinlock.h:363 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1749 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x1f4/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 which would create a new lock dependency: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} -> (&fiq->waitq){+.+.} but this new dependency connects a SOFTIRQ-irq-safe lock: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} [...] Reported-by: syzbot+af05535bb79520f95431@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Reported-by: syzbot+d86c4426a01f60feddc7@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Fixes: bfe4037e722e ("aio: implement IOCB_CMD_POLL") Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v4.19+ Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2019-09-08 20:15:18 -07:00
fuse: fix deadlock with aio poll and fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock When IOCB_CMD_POLL is used on the FUSE device, aio_poll() disables IRQs and takes kioctx::ctx_lock, then fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock. This may have to wait for fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock to be released by one of many places that take it with IRQs enabled. Since the IRQ handler may take kioctx::ctx_lock, lockdep reports that a deadlock is possible. Fix it by protecting the state of struct fuse_iqueue with a separate spinlock, and only accessing fuse_iqueue::waitq using the versions of the waitqueue functions which do IRQ-safe locking internally. Reproducer: #include <fcntl.h> #include <stdio.h> #include <sys/mount.h> #include <sys/stat.h> #include <sys/syscall.h> #include <unistd.h> #include <linux/aio_abi.h> int main() { char opts[128]; int fd = open("/dev/fuse", O_RDWR); aio_context_t ctx = 0; struct iocb cb = { .aio_lio_opcode = IOCB_CMD_POLL, .aio_fildes = fd }; struct iocb *cbp = &cb; sprintf(opts, "fd=%d,rootmode=040000,user_id=0,group_id=0", fd); mkdir("mnt", 0700); mount("foo", "mnt", "fuse", 0, opts); syscall(__NR_io_setup, 1, &ctx); syscall(__NR_io_submit, ctx, 1, &cbp); } Beginning of lockdep output: ===================================================== WARNING: SOFTIRQ-safe -> SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order detected 5.3.0-rc5 #9 Not tainted ----------------------------------------------------- syz_fuse/135 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE0:SE1] is trying to acquire: 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: spin_lock include/linux/spinlock.h:338 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1751 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x203/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 and this task is already holding: 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: spin_lock_irq include/linux/spinlock.h:363 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1749 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x1f4/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 which would create a new lock dependency: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} -> (&fiq->waitq){+.+.} but this new dependency connects a SOFTIRQ-irq-safe lock: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} [...] Reported-by: syzbot+af05535bb79520f95431@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Reported-by: syzbot+d86c4426a01f60feddc7@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Fixes: bfe4037e722e ("aio: implement IOCB_CMD_POLL") Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v4.19+ Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2019-09-08 20:15:18 -07:00
fuse: fix deadlock with aio poll and fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock When IOCB_CMD_POLL is used on the FUSE device, aio_poll() disables IRQs and takes kioctx::ctx_lock, then fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock. This may have to wait for fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock to be released by one of many places that take it with IRQs enabled. Since the IRQ handler may take kioctx::ctx_lock, lockdep reports that a deadlock is possible. Fix it by protecting the state of struct fuse_iqueue with a separate spinlock, and only accessing fuse_iqueue::waitq using the versions of the waitqueue functions which do IRQ-safe locking internally. Reproducer: #include <fcntl.h> #include <stdio.h> #include <sys/mount.h> #include <sys/stat.h> #include <sys/syscall.h> #include <unistd.h> #include <linux/aio_abi.h> int main() { char opts[128]; int fd = open("/dev/fuse", O_RDWR); aio_context_t ctx = 0; struct iocb cb = { .aio_lio_opcode = IOCB_CMD_POLL, .aio_fildes = fd }; struct iocb *cbp = &cb; sprintf(opts, "fd=%d,rootmode=040000,user_id=0,group_id=0", fd); mkdir("mnt", 0700); mount("foo", "mnt", "fuse", 0, opts); syscall(__NR_io_setup, 1, &ctx); syscall(__NR_io_submit, ctx, 1, &cbp); } Beginning of lockdep output: ===================================================== WARNING: SOFTIRQ-safe -> SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order detected 5.3.0-rc5 #9 Not tainted ----------------------------------------------------- syz_fuse/135 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE0:SE1] is trying to acquire: 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: spin_lock include/linux/spinlock.h:338 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1751 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x203/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 and this task is already holding: 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: spin_lock_irq include/linux/spinlock.h:363 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1749 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x1f4/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 which would create a new lock dependency: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} -> (&fiq->waitq){+.+.} but this new dependency connects a SOFTIRQ-irq-safe lock: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} [...] Reported-by: syzbot+af05535bb79520f95431@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Reported-by: syzbot+d86c4426a01f60feddc7@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Fixes: bfe4037e722e ("aio: implement IOCB_CMD_POLL") Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v4.19+ Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2019-09-08 20:15:18 -07:00
fuse: fix deadlock with aio poll and fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock When IOCB_CMD_POLL is used on the FUSE device, aio_poll() disables IRQs and takes kioctx::ctx_lock, then fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock. This may have to wait for fuse_iqueue::waitq.lock to be released by one of many places that take it with IRQs enabled. Since the IRQ handler may take kioctx::ctx_lock, lockdep reports that a deadlock is possible. Fix it by protecting the state of struct fuse_iqueue with a separate spinlock, and only accessing fuse_iqueue::waitq using the versions of the waitqueue functions which do IRQ-safe locking internally. Reproducer: #include <fcntl.h> #include <stdio.h> #include <sys/mount.h> #include <sys/stat.h> #include <sys/syscall.h> #include <unistd.h> #include <linux/aio_abi.h> int main() { char opts[128]; int fd = open("/dev/fuse", O_RDWR); aio_context_t ctx = 0; struct iocb cb = { .aio_lio_opcode = IOCB_CMD_POLL, .aio_fildes = fd }; struct iocb *cbp = &cb; sprintf(opts, "fd=%d,rootmode=040000,user_id=0,group_id=0", fd); mkdir("mnt", 0700); mount("foo", "mnt", "fuse", 0, opts); syscall(__NR_io_setup, 1, &ctx); syscall(__NR_io_submit, ctx, 1, &cbp); } Beginning of lockdep output: ===================================================== WARNING: SOFTIRQ-safe -> SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order detected 5.3.0-rc5 #9 Not tainted ----------------------------------------------------- syz_fuse/135 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE0:SE1] is trying to acquire: 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: spin_lock include/linux/spinlock.h:338 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1751 [inline] 000000003590ceda (&fiq->waitq){+.+.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x203/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 and this task is already holding: 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: spin_lock_irq include/linux/spinlock.h:363 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: aio_poll fs/aio.c:1749 [inline] 0000000075037284 (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.}, at: __io_submit_one.constprop.0+0x1f4/0x5b0 fs/aio.c:1825 which would create a new lock dependency: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} -> (&fiq->waitq){+.+.} but this new dependency connects a SOFTIRQ-irq-safe lock: (&(&ctx->ctx_lock)->rlock){..-.} [...] Reported-by: syzbot+af05535bb79520f95431@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Reported-by: syzbot+d86c4426a01f60feddc7@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Fixes: bfe4037e722e ("aio: implement IOCB_CMD_POLL") Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v4.19+ Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2019-09-08 20:15:18 -07:00
fuse: {io-uring} Handle teardown of ring entries On teardown struct file_operations::uring_cmd requests need to be completed by calling io_uring_cmd_done(). Not completing all ring entries would result in busy io-uring tasks giving warning messages in intervals and unreleased struct file. Additionally the fuse connection and with that the ring can only get released when all io-uring commands are completed. Completion is done with ring entries that are a) in waiting state for new fuse requests - io_uring_cmd_done is needed b) already in userspace - io_uring_cmd_done through teardown is not needed, the request can just get released. If fuse server is still active and commits such a ring entry, fuse_uring_cmd() already checks if the connection is active and then complete the io-uring itself with -ENOTCONN. I.e. special handling is not needed. This scheme is basically represented by the ring entry state FRRS_WAIT and FRRS_USERSPACE. Entries in state: - FRRS_INIT: No action needed, do not contribute to ring->queue_refs yet - All other states: Are currently processed by other tasks, async teardown is needed and it has to wait for the two states above. It could be also solved without an async teardown task, but would require additional if conditions in hot code paths. Also in my personal opinion the code looks cleaner with async teardown. Signed-off-by: Bernd Schubert <bschubert@ddn.com> Reviewed-by: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com> # io_uring Reviewed-by: Luis Henriques <luis@igalia.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2025-01-20 02:29:04 +01:00
fuse: {io-uring} Handle teardown of ring entries On teardown struct file_operations::uring_cmd requests need to be completed by calling io_uring_cmd_done(). Not completing all ring entries would result in busy io-uring tasks giving warning messages in intervals and unreleased struct file. Additionally the fuse connection and with that the ring can only get released when all io-uring commands are completed. Completion is done with ring entries that are a) in waiting state for new fuse requests - io_uring_cmd_done is needed b) already in userspace - io_uring_cmd_done through teardown is not needed, the request can just get released. If fuse server is still active and commits such a ring entry, fuse_uring_cmd() already checks if the connection is active and then complete the io-uring itself with -ENOTCONN. I.e. special handling is not needed. This scheme is basically represented by the ring entry state FRRS_WAIT and FRRS_USERSPACE. Entries in state: - FRRS_INIT: No action needed, do not contribute to ring->queue_refs yet - All other states: Are currently processed by other tasks, async teardown is needed and it has to wait for the two states above. It could be also solved without an async teardown task, but would require additional if conditions in hot code paths. Also in my personal opinion the code looks cleaner with async teardown. Signed-off-by: Bernd Schubert <bschubert@ddn.com> Reviewed-by: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com> # io_uring Reviewed-by: Luis Henriques <luis@igalia.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2025-01-20 02:29:04 +01:00
fuse: explicitly set /dev/fuse file's private_data The misc subsystem (which is used for /dev/fuse) initializes private_data to point to the misc device when a driver has registered a custom open file operation, and initializes it to NULL when a custom open file operation has *not* been provided. This subtle quirk is confusing, to the point where kernel code registers *empty* file open operations to have private_data point to the misc device structure. And it leads to bugs, where the addition or removal of a custom open file operation surprisingly changes the initial contents of a file's private_data structure. So to simplify things in the misc subsystem, a patch [1] has been proposed to *always* set the private_data to point to the misc device, instead of only doing this when a custom open file operation has been registered. But before this patch can be applied we need to modify drivers that make the assumption that a misc device file's private_data is initialized to NULL because they didn't register a custom open file operation, so they don't rely on this assumption anymore. FUSE uses private_data to store the fuse_conn and errors out if this is not initialized to NULL at mount time. Hence, we now set a file's private_data to NULL explicitly, to be independent of whatever value the misc subsystem initializes it to by default. [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/12/4/939 Reported-by: Giedrius Statkevicius <giedriuswork@gmail.com> Reported-by: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Tom Van Braeckel <tomvanbraeckel@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
2015-01-12 05:22:16 +01:00
fuse: support splice() writing to fuse device Allow userspace filesystem implementation to use splice() to write to the fuse device. The semantics of using splice() are: 1) buffer the message header and data in a temporary pipe 2) with a *single* splice() call move the message from the temporary pipe to the fuse device The READ reply message has the most interesting use for this, since now the data from an arbitrary file descriptor (which could be a regular file, a block device or a socket) can be tranferred into the fuse device without having to go through a userspace buffer. It will also allow zero copy moving of pages. One caveat is that the protocol on the fuse device requires the length of the whole message to be written into the header. But the length of the data transferred into the temporary pipe may not be known in advance. The current library implementation works around this by using vmplice to write the header and modifying the header after splicing the data into the pipe (error handling omitted): struct fuse_out_header out; iov.iov_base = &out; iov.iov_len = sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); vmsplice(pip[1], &iov, 1, 0); len = splice(input_fd, input_offset, pip[1], NULL, len, 0); /* retrospectively modify the header: */ out.len = len + sizeof(struct fuse_out_header); splice(pip[0], NULL, fuse_chan_fd(req->ch), NULL, out.len, flags); This works since vmsplice only saves a pointer to the data, it does not copy the data itself. Since pipes are currently limited to 16 pages and messages need to be spliced atomically, the length of the data is limited to 15 pages (or 60kB for 4k pages). Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>
2010-05-25 15:06:06 +02:00