1. 07 Jun, 2019 3 commits
    • J. R. Okajima's avatar
      aufs: bugfix, no nested RCU for kfree() · 0e79e96a
      J. R. Okajima authored
      
      Signed-off-by: default avatarJ. R. Okajima <hooanon05g@gmail.com>
      (cherry picked from commit 4596850541ed7144f7fea951d02f0f6251c4a997)
      0e79e96a
    • J. R. Okajima's avatar
      aufs: possible bugfix, ignore the being freed sbinfo object · 01a1817a
      J. R. Okajima authored
      
      
      The scenario is very similar to previous commit
      "aufs: bugfix, ignore the being freed dynop object".
      One exception is that this commit is for sbinfo object which is managed
      by kobject (instead of kref).
      
      In order to enter the plink-maintenance mode, users write an ID to
      "/proc/fs/aufs/plink_maint" (this path is defined as macros in
      include/uapi/linux/aufs_type.h).  If someone else is unmounting the
      aufs mount corresponding that ID, then the searcher task may find a
      being freed sbinfo object.
      The problem and the fix is very similar to previous commit
      "aufs: bugfix, ignore the being freed dynop object".
      Signed-off-by: default avatarJ. R. Okajima <hooanon05g@gmail.com>
      (cherry picked from commit 949b498ae30797b19b9e7ac9b230815f31ffe378)
      01a1817a
    • J. R. Okajima's avatar
      aufs: bugfix, ignore the being freed dynop object · e870e818
      J. R. Okajima authored
      
      
      Aufs DYNOP (Dynamically customizable FS operations) object is managed by
      kref, and when its counter reaches zero, the callback function removes
      the object from the internal list which is protected by a spinlock and
      then frees the object.
      Here there is a small time window between
      A: the counter reaches zero, and
      B: require the lock to remove the object from the list.
      If someone else acquires the lock and searches the list, it may find the
      counter-zero'ed object which means the object is being freed.
      This commit ignores the object whose counter is already zero.
      Reported-and-tested-by: default avatarKirill Kolyshkin <kolyshkin@gmail.com>
      Signed-off-by: default avatarJ. R. Okajima <hooanon05g@gmail.com>
      (cherry picked from commit b633d7b2635b9615fe294b85257d05008e3747a3)
      e870e818
  2. 27 May, 2019 2 commits
    • J. R. Okajima's avatar
      aufs: tiny, missing a parameter declaration · 3a9c732c
      J. R. Okajima authored
      
      Signed-off-by: default avatarJ. R. Okajima <hooanon05g@gmail.com>
      (cherry picked from commit 9dbd45984201453ecebcc03a91699878aa38239d)
      3a9c732c
    • J. R. Okajima's avatar
      aufs: bugfix, protect creating XINO from concurrent mounts · abf61326
      J. R. Okajima authored
      
      
      At the mount-time, XINO files are created and removed very soon.  When
      multiple mounts with being given the same XINO file path executed in
      parallel, some of them may fail in creating XINO due to EEXIST.
      Introducing a local mutex, make it serialized.
      By default, XINO is created at the top dir of the first writable
      branch.  In this case, the new mutex won't be used.
      
      Obviously this is an unnecessary overhead when the XINO file path is not
      same, and such lock should be done by inode_lock() for the parent dir.
      Actually au_xino_create2() behaves in this manner.  Then why didn't I
      apply the same way to this au_xino_create()?  It is just because of my
      laziness.  Calling VFS filp_open() here is easy for me.
      Reported-by: default avatarKirill Kolyshkin <kolyshkin@gmail.com>
      Signed-off-by: default avatarJ. R. Okajima <hooanon05g@gmail.com>
      (cherry picked from commit 30d9273f2a1ce331b1a79b770bdb4c493919a673)
      abf61326
  3. 09 Mar, 2019 35 commits