[PATCH v3 5/7] fs: handle hypothetical filesystems which use I_DONTCACHE and drop the lock in ->drop_inode

Mateusz Guzik posted 7 patches 3 days, 17 hours ago
There is a newer version of this series
[PATCH v3 5/7] fs: handle hypothetical filesystems which use I_DONTCACHE and drop the lock in ->drop_inode
Posted by Mateusz Guzik 3 days, 17 hours ago
f2fs and ntfs play games where they transitiong the refcount 0->1 and release
the inode spinlock, allowing other threads to grab a ref of their own.
They also return 0 in that case, making this problem harmless.

Should they start using the I_DONTCACHE machinery down the road while
retaining the above, iput_final() will get a race where it can proceed
to teardown an inode with references.

Future-proof it.

Developing better ->drop_inode and sanitizing all users is left as en
exercise for the reader.

Signed-off-by: Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com>
---
 fs/inode.c | 27 ++++++++++++++++++---------
 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/inode.c b/fs/inode.c
index 0050eca6d83f..a417abc64822 100644
--- a/fs/inode.c
+++ b/fs/inode.c
@@ -1935,20 +1935,29 @@ static void iput_final(struct inode *inode)
 	else
 		drop = inode_generic_drop(inode);
 
-	if (!drop &&
-	    !(inode_state_read(inode) & I_DONTCACHE) &&
-	    (sb->s_flags & SB_ACTIVE)) {
+	/*
+	 * XXXCRAP: there are ->drop_inode hooks playing nasty games releasing the
+	 * spinlock and temporarily grabbing refs. This opens a possibility someone
+	 * else will sneak in and grab a ref while it happens.
+	 *
+	 * If such a hook returns 0 (== don't drop) this happens to be harmless as long
+	 * as the inode is not marked with I_DONTCACHE. Otherwise we are proceeding with
+	 * teardown despite references being present.
+	 *
+	 * Damage-control the problem by including the count in the decision. However,
+	 * assert no refs showed up if the hook decided to drop the inode.
+	 */
+	if (drop)
+		VFS_BUG_ON_INODE(icount_read(inode) != 0, inode);
+
+	if (icount_read(inode) > 0 ||
+	    (!drop && !(inode_state_read(inode) & I_DONTCACHE) &&
+	    (sb->s_flags & SB_ACTIVE))) {
 		__inode_lru_list_add(inode, true);
 		spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock);
 		return;
 	}
 
-	/*
-	 * Re-check ->i_count in case the ->drop_inode() hooks played games.
-	 * Note we only execute this if the verdict was to drop the inode.
-	 */
-	VFS_BUG_ON_INODE(icount_read(inode) != 0, inode);
-
 	if (drop) {
 		inode_state_set(inode, I_FREEING);
 	} else {
-- 
2.48.1
Re: [PATCH v3 5/7] fs: handle hypothetical filesystems which use I_DONTCACHE and drop the lock in ->drop_inode
Posted by Christian Brauner 1 day, 23 hours ago
On Sun, Mar 29, 2026 at 07:20:00PM +0200, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
> f2fs and ntfs play games where they transitiong the refcount 0->1 and release
> the inode spinlock, allowing other threads to grab a ref of their own.
> They also return 0 in that case, making this problem harmless.
> 
> Should they start using the I_DONTCACHE machinery down the road while
> retaining the above, iput_final() will get a race where it can proceed
> to teardown an inode with references.
> 
> Future-proof it.
> 
> Developing better ->drop_inode and sanitizing all users is left as en
> exercise for the reader.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com>
> ---
>  fs/inode.c | 27 ++++++++++++++++++---------
>  1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/inode.c b/fs/inode.c
> index 0050eca6d83f..a417abc64822 100644
> --- a/fs/inode.c
> +++ b/fs/inode.c
> @@ -1935,20 +1935,29 @@ static void iput_final(struct inode *inode)
>  	else
>  		drop = inode_generic_drop(inode);
>  
> -	if (!drop &&
> -	    !(inode_state_read(inode) & I_DONTCACHE) &&
> -	    (sb->s_flags & SB_ACTIVE)) {
> +	/*
> +	 * XXXCRAP: there are ->drop_inode hooks playing nasty games releasing the

Let's make that a "Note:" and remove that "XXXCRAP", please. The "nasty
games" is plenty meta commentary.

> +	 * spinlock and temporarily grabbing refs. This opens a possibility someone
> +	 * else will sneak in and grab a ref while it happens.
> +	 *
> +	 * If such a hook returns 0 (== don't drop) this happens to be harmless as long
> +	 * as the inode is not marked with I_DONTCACHE. Otherwise we are proceeding with
> +	 * teardown despite references being present.
> +	 *
> +	 * Damage-control the problem by including the count in the decision. However,
> +	 * assert no refs showed up if the hook decided to drop the inode.
> +	 */
> +	if (drop)
> +		VFS_BUG_ON_INODE(icount_read(inode) != 0, inode);
> +
> +	if (icount_read(inode) > 0 ||
> +	    (!drop && !(inode_state_read(inode) & I_DONTCACHE) &&
> +	    (sb->s_flags & SB_ACTIVE))) {
>  		__inode_lru_list_add(inode, true);
>  		spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock);
>  		return;
>  	}
>  
> -	/*
> -	 * Re-check ->i_count in case the ->drop_inode() hooks played games.
> -	 * Note we only execute this if the verdict was to drop the inode.
> -	 */
> -	VFS_BUG_ON_INODE(icount_read(inode) != 0, inode);
> -
>  	if (drop) {
>  		inode_state_set(inode, I_FREEING);
>  	} else {
> -- 
> 2.48.1
>
Re: [PATCH v3 5/7] fs: handle hypothetical filesystems which use I_DONTCACHE and drop the lock in ->drop_inode
Posted by Mateusz Guzik 1 day, 23 hours ago
On Tue, Mar 31, 2026 at 1:23 PM Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Mar 29, 2026 at 07:20:00PM +0200, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
> > diff --git a/fs/inode.c b/fs/inode.c
> > index 0050eca6d83f..a417abc64822 100644
> > --- a/fs/inode.c
> > +++ b/fs/inode.c
> > @@ -1935,20 +1935,29 @@ static void iput_final(struct inode *inode)
> >       else
> >               drop = inode_generic_drop(inode);
> >
> > -     if (!drop &&
> > -         !(inode_state_read(inode) & I_DONTCACHE) &&
> > -         (sb->s_flags & SB_ACTIVE)) {
> > +     /*
> > +      * XXXCRAP: there are ->drop_inode hooks playing nasty games releasing the
>
> Let's make that a "Note:" and remove that "XXXCRAP", please. The "nasty
> games" is plenty meta commentary.
>

"FIXME"? Given that v4 is already out, perhaps you can do the honors? :)