fs/ceph/super.c | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
Because ceph_init_fs_context() will never be invoced in case we get a
mount error, destroy_mount_options() won't be releasing fscrypt resources
with fscrypt_free_dummy_policy(). This will result in a memory leak. Add
an invocation to this function in the mount error path.
Signed-off-by: Luís Henriques <lhenriques@suse.de>
---
* Changes since v1:
As suggested by Xiubo, moved fscrypt free from ceph_get_tree() to
ceph_real_mount().
(Also used 'git format-patch' with '--base' so that the bots know what to
(not) do with this patch.)
fs/ceph/super.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/fs/ceph/super.c b/fs/ceph/super.c
index 2224d44d21c0..f10a076f47e5 100644
--- a/fs/ceph/super.c
+++ b/fs/ceph/super.c
@@ -1196,6 +1196,7 @@ static struct dentry *ceph_real_mount(struct ceph_fs_client *fsc,
out:
mutex_unlock(&fsc->client->mount_mutex);
+ ceph_fscrypt_free_dummy_policy(fsc);
return ERR_PTR(err);
}
base-commit: 8b9ee21dfceadd4cc35a87bbe7f0ad547cffa1be
prerequisite-patch-id: 34ba9e6b37b68668d261ddbda7858ee6f83c82fa
prerequisite-patch-id: 87f1b323c29ab8d0a6d012d30fdc39bc49179624
prerequisite-patch-id: c94f448ef026375b10748457a3aa46070aa7046e
On 08/11/2022 22:34, Luís Henriques wrote: > Because ceph_init_fs_context() will never be invoced in case we get a > mount error, destroy_mount_options() won't be releasing fscrypt resources > with fscrypt_free_dummy_policy(). This will result in a memory leak. Add > an invocation to this function in the mount error path. > > Signed-off-by: Luís Henriques <lhenriques@suse.de> > --- > * Changes since v1: > > As suggested by Xiubo, moved fscrypt free from ceph_get_tree() to > ceph_real_mount(). > > (Also used 'git format-patch' with '--base' so that the bots know what to > (not) do with this patch.) > > fs/ceph/super.c | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/fs/ceph/super.c b/fs/ceph/super.c > index 2224d44d21c0..f10a076f47e5 100644 > --- a/fs/ceph/super.c > +++ b/fs/ceph/super.c > @@ -1196,6 +1196,7 @@ static struct dentry *ceph_real_mount(struct ceph_fs_client *fsc, > > out: > mutex_unlock(&fsc->client->mount_mutex); > + ceph_fscrypt_free_dummy_policy(fsc); > return ERR_PTR(err); > } > > > base-commit: 8b9ee21dfceadd4cc35a87bbe7f0ad547cffa1be > prerequisite-patch-id: 34ba9e6b37b68668d261ddbda7858ee6f83c82fa > prerequisite-patch-id: 87f1b323c29ab8d0a6d012d30fdc39bc49179624 > prerequisite-patch-id: c94f448ef026375b10748457a3aa46070aa7046e > LGTM. Thanks Luis. Could I fold this into the previous commit ? BRs - Xiubo
On Wed, Nov 09, 2022 at 11:08:49AM +0800, Xiubo Li wrote: > > On 08/11/2022 22:34, Luís Henriques wrote: > > Because ceph_init_fs_context() will never be invoced in case we get a > > mount error, destroy_mount_options() won't be releasing fscrypt resources > > with fscrypt_free_dummy_policy(). This will result in a memory leak. Add > > an invocation to this function in the mount error path. > > > > Signed-off-by: Luís Henriques <lhenriques@suse.de> > > --- > > * Changes since v1: > > > > As suggested by Xiubo, moved fscrypt free from ceph_get_tree() to > > ceph_real_mount(). > > > > (Also used 'git format-patch' with '--base' so that the bots know what to > > (not) do with this patch.) > > > > fs/ceph/super.c | 1 + > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > > > diff --git a/fs/ceph/super.c b/fs/ceph/super.c > > index 2224d44d21c0..f10a076f47e5 100644 > > --- a/fs/ceph/super.c > > +++ b/fs/ceph/super.c > > @@ -1196,6 +1196,7 @@ static struct dentry *ceph_real_mount(struct ceph_fs_client *fsc, > > out: > > mutex_unlock(&fsc->client->mount_mutex); > > + ceph_fscrypt_free_dummy_policy(fsc); > > return ERR_PTR(err); > > } > > > > base-commit: 8b9ee21dfceadd4cc35a87bbe7f0ad547cffa1be > > prerequisite-patch-id: 34ba9e6b37b68668d261ddbda7858ee6f83c82fa > > prerequisite-patch-id: 87f1b323c29ab8d0a6d012d30fdc39bc49179624 > > prerequisite-patch-id: c94f448ef026375b10748457a3aa46070aa7046e > > > LGTM. > > Thanks Luis. > > Could I fold this into the previous commit ? Yes, sure. I'm fine with that. Cheers, -- Luís
Hi Luis, Please check https://github.com/ceph/ceph-client/commit/205efda80b6759a741dde209a7158a5bbf044d23#diff-eb62c69f842ed95a7d047262a62946b07eda52f2ea49ae33c39ea13754dfc291. Currently I only applied it into the 'testing' branch. Thanks! - Xiubo On 09/11/2022 17:33, Luís Henriques wrote: > On Wed, Nov 09, 2022 at 11:08:49AM +0800, Xiubo Li wrote: >> On 08/11/2022 22:34, Luís Henriques wrote: >>> Because ceph_init_fs_context() will never be invoced in case we get a >>> mount error, destroy_mount_options() won't be releasing fscrypt resources >>> with fscrypt_free_dummy_policy(). This will result in a memory leak. Add >>> an invocation to this function in the mount error path. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Luís Henriques <lhenriques@suse.de> >>> --- >>> * Changes since v1: >>> >>> As suggested by Xiubo, moved fscrypt free from ceph_get_tree() to >>> ceph_real_mount(). >>> >>> (Also used 'git format-patch' with '--base' so that the bots know what to >>> (not) do with this patch.) >>> >>> fs/ceph/super.c | 1 + >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/fs/ceph/super.c b/fs/ceph/super.c >>> index 2224d44d21c0..f10a076f47e5 100644 >>> --- a/fs/ceph/super.c >>> +++ b/fs/ceph/super.c >>> @@ -1196,6 +1196,7 @@ static struct dentry *ceph_real_mount(struct ceph_fs_client *fsc, >>> out: >>> mutex_unlock(&fsc->client->mount_mutex); >>> + ceph_fscrypt_free_dummy_policy(fsc); >>> return ERR_PTR(err); >>> } >>> >>> base-commit: 8b9ee21dfceadd4cc35a87bbe7f0ad547cffa1be >>> prerequisite-patch-id: 34ba9e6b37b68668d261ddbda7858ee6f83c82fa >>> prerequisite-patch-id: 87f1b323c29ab8d0a6d012d30fdc39bc49179624 >>> prerequisite-patch-id: c94f448ef026375b10748457a3aa46070aa7046e >>> >> LGTM. >> >> Thanks Luis. >> >> Could I fold this into the previous commit ? > Yes, sure. I'm fine with that. > > Cheers, > -- > Luís >
On Wed, Nov 09, 2022 at 05:57:41PM +0800, Xiubo Li wrote:
> Hi Luis,
>
> Please check https://github.com/ceph/ceph-client/commit/205efda80b6759a741dde209a7158a5bbf044d23#diff-eb62c69f842ed95a7d047262a62946b07eda52f2ea49ae33c39ea13754dfc291.
Ugh! That's quite confusing :-)
I did a 'git fetch' and looked into commit 205efda80b67 ("ceph: implement
-o test_dummy_encryption mount option") instead, and compared it with it's
version in the wip-fscrypt branch. It looks good to me: the only
difference I see is my fix (adding the 'ceph_fscrypt_free_dummy_policy'
call to 'ceph_real_mount'). Thanks!
Cheers,
--
Luís
>
> Currently I only applied it into the 'testing' branch.
>
> Thanks!
>
> - Xiubo
>
>
> On 09/11/2022 17:33, Luís Henriques wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 09, 2022 at 11:08:49AM +0800, Xiubo Li wrote:
> > > On 08/11/2022 22:34, Luís Henriques wrote:
> > > > Because ceph_init_fs_context() will never be invoced in case we get a
> > > > mount error, destroy_mount_options() won't be releasing fscrypt resources
> > > > with fscrypt_free_dummy_policy(). This will result in a memory leak. Add
> > > > an invocation to this function in the mount error path.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Luís Henriques <lhenriques@suse.de>
> > > > ---
> > > > * Changes since v1:
> > > >
> > > > As suggested by Xiubo, moved fscrypt free from ceph_get_tree() to
> > > > ceph_real_mount().
> > > >
> > > > (Also used 'git format-patch' with '--base' so that the bots know what to
> > > > (not) do with this patch.)
> > > >
> > > > fs/ceph/super.c | 1 +
> > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/fs/ceph/super.c b/fs/ceph/super.c
> > > > index 2224d44d21c0..f10a076f47e5 100644
> > > > --- a/fs/ceph/super.c
> > > > +++ b/fs/ceph/super.c
> > > > @@ -1196,6 +1196,7 @@ static struct dentry *ceph_real_mount(struct ceph_fs_client *fsc,
> > > > out:
> > > > mutex_unlock(&fsc->client->mount_mutex);
> > > > + ceph_fscrypt_free_dummy_policy(fsc);
> > > > return ERR_PTR(err);
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > base-commit: 8b9ee21dfceadd4cc35a87bbe7f0ad547cffa1be
> > > > prerequisite-patch-id: 34ba9e6b37b68668d261ddbda7858ee6f83c82fa
> > > > prerequisite-patch-id: 87f1b323c29ab8d0a6d012d30fdc39bc49179624
> > > > prerequisite-patch-id: c94f448ef026375b10748457a3aa46070aa7046e
> > > >
> > > LGTM.
> > >
> > > Thanks Luis.
> > >
> > > Could I fold this into the previous commit ?
> > Yes, sure. I'm fine with that.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > --
> > Luís
> >
>
On 09/11/2022 18:38, Luís Henriques wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 09, 2022 at 05:57:41PM +0800, Xiubo Li wrote:
>> Hi Luis,
>>
>> Please check https://github.com/ceph/ceph-client/commit/205efda80b6759a741dde209a7158a5bbf044d23#diff-eb62c69f842ed95a7d047262a62946b07eda52f2ea49ae33c39ea13754dfc291.
> Ugh! That's quite confusing :-)
>
> I did a 'git fetch' and looked into commit 205efda80b67 ("ceph: implement
> -o test_dummy_encryption mount option") instead, and compared it with it's
> version in the wip-fscrypt branch. It looks good to me: the only
> difference I see is my fix (adding the 'ceph_fscrypt_free_dummy_policy'
> call to 'ceph_real_mount'). Thanks!
I will update the wip-fscrypt branch later.
Thanks!
> Cheers,
> --
> Luís
>
>> Currently I only applied it into the 'testing' branch.
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> - Xiubo
>>
>>
>> On 09/11/2022 17:33, Luís Henriques wrote:
>>> On Wed, Nov 09, 2022 at 11:08:49AM +0800, Xiubo Li wrote:
>>>> On 08/11/2022 22:34, Luís Henriques wrote:
>>>>> Because ceph_init_fs_context() will never be invoced in case we get a
>>>>> mount error, destroy_mount_options() won't be releasing fscrypt resources
>>>>> with fscrypt_free_dummy_policy(). This will result in a memory leak. Add
>>>>> an invocation to this function in the mount error path.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Luís Henriques <lhenriques@suse.de>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> * Changes since v1:
>>>>>
>>>>> As suggested by Xiubo, moved fscrypt free from ceph_get_tree() to
>>>>> ceph_real_mount().
>>>>>
>>>>> (Also used 'git format-patch' with '--base' so that the bots know what to
>>>>> (not) do with this patch.)
>>>>>
>>>>> fs/ceph/super.c | 1 +
>>>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/fs/ceph/super.c b/fs/ceph/super.c
>>>>> index 2224d44d21c0..f10a076f47e5 100644
>>>>> --- a/fs/ceph/super.c
>>>>> +++ b/fs/ceph/super.c
>>>>> @@ -1196,6 +1196,7 @@ static struct dentry *ceph_real_mount(struct ceph_fs_client *fsc,
>>>>> out:
>>>>> mutex_unlock(&fsc->client->mount_mutex);
>>>>> + ceph_fscrypt_free_dummy_policy(fsc);
>>>>> return ERR_PTR(err);
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> base-commit: 8b9ee21dfceadd4cc35a87bbe7f0ad547cffa1be
>>>>> prerequisite-patch-id: 34ba9e6b37b68668d261ddbda7858ee6f83c82fa
>>>>> prerequisite-patch-id: 87f1b323c29ab8d0a6d012d30fdc39bc49179624
>>>>> prerequisite-patch-id: c94f448ef026375b10748457a3aa46070aa7046e
>>>>>
>>>> LGTM.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks Luis.
>>>>
>>>> Could I fold this into the previous commit ?
>>> Yes, sure. I'm fine with that.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> --
>>> Luís
>>>
On 09/11/2022 17:33, Luís Henriques wrote: > On Wed, Nov 09, 2022 at 11:08:49AM +0800, Xiubo Li wrote: >> On 08/11/2022 22:34, Luís Henriques wrote: >>> Because ceph_init_fs_context() will never be invoced in case we get a >>> mount error, destroy_mount_options() won't be releasing fscrypt resources >>> with fscrypt_free_dummy_policy(). This will result in a memory leak. Add >>> an invocation to this function in the mount error path. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Luís Henriques <lhenriques@suse.de> >>> --- >>> * Changes since v1: >>> >>> As suggested by Xiubo, moved fscrypt free from ceph_get_tree() to >>> ceph_real_mount(). >>> >>> (Also used 'git format-patch' with '--base' so that the bots know what to >>> (not) do with this patch.) >>> >>> fs/ceph/super.c | 1 + >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/fs/ceph/super.c b/fs/ceph/super.c >>> index 2224d44d21c0..f10a076f47e5 100644 >>> --- a/fs/ceph/super.c >>> +++ b/fs/ceph/super.c >>> @@ -1196,6 +1196,7 @@ static struct dentry *ceph_real_mount(struct ceph_fs_client *fsc, >>> out: >>> mutex_unlock(&fsc->client->mount_mutex); >>> + ceph_fscrypt_free_dummy_policy(fsc); >>> return ERR_PTR(err); >>> } >>> >>> base-commit: 8b9ee21dfceadd4cc35a87bbe7f0ad547cffa1be >>> prerequisite-patch-id: 34ba9e6b37b68668d261ddbda7858ee6f83c82fa >>> prerequisite-patch-id: 87f1b323c29ab8d0a6d012d30fdc39bc49179624 >>> prerequisite-patch-id: c94f448ef026375b10748457a3aa46070aa7046e >>> >> LGTM. >> >> Thanks Luis. >> >> Could I fold this into the previous commit ? > Yes, sure. I'm fine with that. Thanks. I will mentioned this fix in that commit comments. - Xiubo > > Cheers, > -- > Luís >
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.