Re: nbd: add locking to nbd_ioctl

[Paul Clements]

Pavel Machek wrote:
> > Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > On Fri 2009-01-16 10:24:06, Paul Clements wrote:

> > lo->sock is only modified under tx_lock (except for SET_SOCK, where the 
> > device is being initialized, in which case it's impossible for any other 
> > thread to be accessing the device)
>
> Well, unless the user is evil or confused? :-).

Even in that case, you're just going to get EBUSY. Nothing bad will 
happen. SET_SOCK checks for lo->file, so it cannot be called on an 
active nbd device.


> > As for other fields, I assume you're talking about blksize, et al. 
> > Taking tx_lock doesn't prevent you from screwing yourself if you modify 
> > those while the device is active. You'd need to disallow those ioctls 
> > when the device is active (check lo->file). Again, this is only going to 
> > happen if you really misuse the ioctls.
>
> Ok, I'll take a look at the missing checks. I'd really like to make
> this "stable" -- no amount of misuse should crash the kernel.

Just to summarize, I don't think we need to hold tx_lock around the 
entirety of nbd_ioctl. We do need one extra tx_lock around xmit_timeout 
and we do need to check for lo->file and return EBUSY in all of the 
SET_*SIZE* ioctls.

Thanks,
Paul

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/