fuse: in fuse_flush only wait if someone wants the return code

Browse source

If a fuse filesystem is mounted inside a container, there is a problem
during pid namespace destruction. The scenario is:

1. task (a thread in the fuse server, with a fuse file open) starts
   exiting, does exit_signals(), goes into fuse_flush() -> wait
2. fuse daemon gets killed, tries to wake everyone up
3. task from 1 is stuck because complete_signal() doesn't wake it up, since
   it has PF_EXITING.

The result is that the thread will never be woken up, and pid namespace
destruction will block indefinitely.

To add insult to injury, nobody is waiting for these return codes, since
the pid namespace is being destroyed.

To fix this, let's not block on flush operations when the current task has
PF_EXITING.

This does change the semantics slightly: the wait here is for posix locks
to be unlocked, so the task will exit before things are unlocked. To quote
Miklos:

  "remote" posix locks are almost never used due to problems like this, so
  I think it's safe to do this.

Signed-off-by: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Signed-off-by: Tycho Andersen <tycho@tycho.pizza>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/YrShFXRLtRt6T%2Fj+@risky/
Tested-by: Tycho Andersen <tycho@tycho.pizza>
Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>

...

This commit is contained in:

Eric W. Biederman 2023-01-26 17:10:58 +01:00 • committed by Miklos Szeredi

parent 8ed7cb3f27

commit 5a8bee63b1

1 changed files with 63 additions and 26 deletions

Show all changes Ignore whitespace when comparing lines Ignore changes in amount of whitespace Ignore changes in whitespace at EOL

Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

89

fs/fuse/file.c

View file