Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2 v2] ceph: use a xarray to record all the opened files for each inode | From | Xiubo Li <> | Date | Mon, 14 Nov 2022 21:08:15 +0800 |
| |
Hi
Thanks for reporting this.
I will fix it in the next version.
- Xiubo
On 14/11/2022 16:54, kernel test robot wrote: > Hi, > > I love your patch! Perhaps something to improve: > > [auto build test WARNING on ceph-client/testing] > [also build test WARNING on ceph-client/for-linus linus/master v6.1-rc5 next-20221111] > [If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note. > And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in > https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch#_base_tree_information] > > url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/xiubli-redhat-com/ceph-fix-the-use-after-free-bug-for-file_lock/20221114-132233 > base: https://github.com/ceph/ceph-client.git testing > patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20221114051901.15371-3-xiubli%40redhat.com > patch subject: [PATCH 2/2 v2] ceph: use a xarray to record all the opened files for each inode > config: hexagon-randconfig-r041-20221114 > compiler: clang version 16.0.0 (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project 463da45892e2d2a262277b91b96f5f8c05dc25d0) > reproduce (this is a W=1 build): > wget https://raw.githubusercontent.com/intel/lkp-tests/master/sbin/make.cross -O ~/bin/make.cross > chmod +x ~/bin/make.cross > # https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commit/232cc8f1dbeddb308946202a7c67ee4d20451ae7 > git remote add linux-review https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux > git fetch --no-tags linux-review xiubli-redhat-com/ceph-fix-the-use-after-free-bug-for-file_lock/20221114-132233 > git checkout 232cc8f1dbeddb308946202a7c67ee4d20451ae7 > # save the config file > mkdir build_dir && cp config build_dir/.config > COMPILER_INSTALL_PATH=$HOME/0day COMPILER=clang make.cross W=1 O=build_dir ARCH=hexagon SHELL=/bin/bash fs/ceph/ > > If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag where applicable > | Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> > > All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>): > > In file included from fs/ceph/locks.c:8: > In file included from fs/ceph/super.h:8: > In file included from include/linux/backing-dev.h:16: > In file included from include/linux/writeback.h:13: > In file included from include/linux/blk_types.h:10: > In file included from include/linux/bvec.h:10: > In file included from include/linux/highmem.h:12: > In file included from include/linux/hardirq.h:11: > In file included from ./arch/hexagon/include/generated/asm/hardirq.h:1: > In file included from include/asm-generic/hardirq.h:17: > In file included from include/linux/irq.h:20: > In file included from include/linux/io.h:13: > In file included from arch/hexagon/include/asm/io.h:334: > include/asm-generic/io.h:547:31: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic] > val = __raw_readb(PCI_IOBASE + addr); > ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ > include/asm-generic/io.h:560:61: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic] > val = __le16_to_cpu((__le16 __force)__raw_readw(PCI_IOBASE + addr)); > ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ > include/uapi/linux/byteorder/little_endian.h:37:51: note: expanded from macro '__le16_to_cpu' > #define __le16_to_cpu(x) ((__force __u16)(__le16)(x)) > ^ > In file included from fs/ceph/locks.c:8: > In file included from fs/ceph/super.h:8: > In file included from include/linux/backing-dev.h:16: > In file included from include/linux/writeback.h:13: > In file included from include/linux/blk_types.h:10: > In file included from include/linux/bvec.h:10: > In file included from include/linux/highmem.h:12: > In file included from include/linux/hardirq.h:11: > In file included from ./arch/hexagon/include/generated/asm/hardirq.h:1: > In file included from include/asm-generic/hardirq.h:17: > In file included from include/linux/irq.h:20: > In file included from include/linux/io.h:13: > In file included from arch/hexagon/include/asm/io.h:334: > include/asm-generic/io.h:573:61: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic] > val = __le32_to_cpu((__le32 __force)__raw_readl(PCI_IOBASE + addr)); > ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ > include/uapi/linux/byteorder/little_endian.h:35:51: note: expanded from macro '__le32_to_cpu' > #define __le32_to_cpu(x) ((__force __u32)(__le32)(x)) > ^ > In file included from fs/ceph/locks.c:8: > In file included from fs/ceph/super.h:8: > In file included from include/linux/backing-dev.h:16: > In file included from include/linux/writeback.h:13: > In file included from include/linux/blk_types.h:10: > In file included from include/linux/bvec.h:10: > In file included from include/linux/highmem.h:12: > In file included from include/linux/hardirq.h:11: > In file included from ./arch/hexagon/include/generated/asm/hardirq.h:1: > In file included from include/asm-generic/hardirq.h:17: > In file included from include/linux/irq.h:20: > In file included from include/linux/io.h:13: > In file included from arch/hexagon/include/asm/io.h:334: > include/asm-generic/io.h:584:33: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic] > __raw_writeb(value, PCI_IOBASE + addr); > ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ > include/asm-generic/io.h:594:59: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic] > __raw_writew((u16 __force)cpu_to_le16(value), PCI_IOBASE + addr); > ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ > include/asm-generic/io.h:604:59: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic] > __raw_writel((u32 __force)cpu_to_le32(value), PCI_IOBASE + addr); > ~~~~~~~~~~ ^ >>> fs/ceph/locks.c:66:6: warning: variable 'fi' is used uninitialized whenever 'if' condition is false [-Wsometimes-uninitialized] > if (val == CEPH_FILP_AVAILABLE) { > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > fs/ceph/locks.c:79:14: note: uninitialized use occurs here > atomic_dec(&fi->num_locks); > ^~ > fs/ceph/locks.c:66:2: note: remove the 'if' if its condition is always true > if (val == CEPH_FILP_AVAILABLE) { > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > fs/ceph/locks.c:47:27: note: initialize the variable 'fi' to silence this warning > struct ceph_file_info *fi; > ^ > = NULL > 7 warnings generated. > > > vim +66 fs/ceph/locks.c > > 42 > 43 static void ceph_fl_release_lock(struct file_lock *fl) > 44 { > 45 struct inode *inode = fl->fl_u.ceph_fl.fl_inode; > 46 struct ceph_inode_info *ci; > 47 struct ceph_file_info *fi; > 48 void *val; > 49 > 50 /* > 51 * If inode is NULL it should be a request file_lock, > 52 * nothing we can do. > 53 */ > 54 if (!inode) > 55 return; > 56 > 57 ci = ceph_inode(inode); > 58 > 59 /* > 60 * For Posix-style locks, it may race between filp_close()s, > 61 * and it's possible that the 'file' memory pointed by > 62 * 'fl->fl_file' has been released. If so just skip it. > 63 */ > 64 rcu_read_lock(); > 65 val = xa_load(&ci->i_opened_files, (unsigned long)fl->fl_file); > > 66 if (val == CEPH_FILP_AVAILABLE) { > 67 fi = fl->fl_file->private_data; > 68 atomic_dec(&fi->num_locks); > 69 } > 70 rcu_read_unlock(); > 71 > 72 if (atomic_dec_and_test(&ci->i_filelock_ref)) { > 73 /* clear error when all locks are released */ > 74 spin_lock(&ci->i_ceph_lock); > 75 ci->i_ceph_flags &= ~CEPH_I_ERROR_FILELOCK; > 76 spin_unlock(&ci->i_ceph_lock); > 77 } > 78 iput(inode); > 79 atomic_dec(&fi->num_locks); > 80 } > 81 >
| |