Re: [PATCH 16/53] ovl: drop dir lock for lookups in impure readdir
From: Amir Goldstein
Date: Fri Mar 20 2026 - 10:57:24 EST
On Wed, Mar 18, 2026 at 10:10 PM NeilBrown <neilb@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> [[ CC list trimmed ]]
>
> On Mon, 16 Mar 2026, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 12, 2026 at 10:49 PM NeilBrown <neilb@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > From: NeilBrown <neil@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > When performing an "impure" readdir, ovl needs to perform a lookup on some
> > > of the names that it found.
> > > With proposed locking changes it will not be possible to perform this
> > > lookup (in particular, not safe to wait for d_alloc_parallel()) while
> > > holding a lock on the directory.
> > >
> > > ovl doesn't really need the lock at this point.
> >
> > Not exactly. see below.
> >
> > > It has already iterated
> > > the directory and has cached a list of the contents. It now needs to
> > > gather extra information about some contents. It can do this without
> > > the lock.
> > >
> > > After gathering that info it needs to retake the lock for API
> > > correctness. After doing this it must check IS_DEADDIR() again to
> > > ensure readdir always returns -ENOENT on a removed directory.
> > >
> > > Note that while ->iterate_shared is called with a shared lock, ovl uses
> > > WRAP_DIR_ITER() so an exclusive lock is held and so we drop and retake
> > > that exclusive lock.
> > >
> > > As the directory is no longer locked in ovl_cache_update() we need
> > > dget_parent() to get a reference to the parent.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neil@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > fs/overlayfs/readdir.c | 19 ++++++++++++-------
> > > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/fs/overlayfs/readdir.c b/fs/overlayfs/readdir.c
> > > index 1dcc75b3a90f..d5123b37921c 100644
> > > --- a/fs/overlayfs/readdir.c
> > > +++ b/fs/overlayfs/readdir.c
> > > @@ -568,13 +568,12 @@ static int ovl_cache_update(const struct path *path, struct ovl_cache_entry *p,
> > > goto get;
> > > }
> > > if (p->len == 2) {
> > > - /* we shall not be moved */
> > > - this = dget(dir->d_parent);
> > > + this = dget_parent(dir);
> > > goto get;
> > > }
> > > }
> > > /* This checks also for xwhiteouts */
> > > - this = lookup_one(mnt_idmap(path->mnt), &QSTR_LEN(p->name, p->len), dir);
> > > + this = lookup_one_unlocked(mnt_idmap(path->mnt), &QSTR_LEN(p->name, p->len), dir);
> >
> > ovl_cache_update() is also called from ovl_iterate_merged() where inode
> > is locked.
> >
> > > if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(this) || !this->d_inode) {
> > > /* Mark a stale entry */
> > > p->is_whiteout = true;
> > > @@ -666,11 +665,12 @@ static int ovl_dir_read_impure(const struct path *path, struct list_head *list,
> > > if (err)
> > > return err;
> > >
> > > + inode_unlock(path->dentry->d_inode);
> > > list_for_each_entry_safe(p, n, list, l_node) {
> > > if (!name_is_dot_dotdot(p->name, p->len)) {
> > > err = ovl_cache_update(path, p, true);
> > > if (err)
> > > - return err;
> > > + break;
> > > }
> > > if (p->ino == p->real_ino) {
> > > list_del(&p->l_node);
> > > @@ -680,14 +680,19 @@ static int ovl_dir_read_impure(const struct path *path, struct list_head *list,
> > > struct rb_node *parent = NULL;
> > >
> > > if (WARN_ON(ovl_cache_entry_find_link(p->name, p->len,
> > > - &newp, &parent)))
> > > - return -EIO;
> > > + &newp, &parent))) {
> > > + err = -EIO;
> > > + break;
> > > + }
> > >
> > > rb_link_node(&p->node, parent, newp);
> > > rb_insert_color(&p->node, root);
> > > }
> > > }
> > > - return 0;
> > > + inode_lock(path->dentry->d_inode);
> > > + if (IS_DEADDIR(path->dentry->d_inode))
> > > + err = -ENOENT;
> > > + return err;
> > > }
> > >
> > > static struct ovl_dir_cache *ovl_cache_get_impure(const struct path *path)
> > > --
> >
> > You missed the fact that overlayfs uses the dir inode lock
> > to protect the readdir inode cache, so your patch introduces
> > a risk for storing a stale readdir cache when dir modify operations
> > invalidate the readdir cache version while lock is dropped
> > and also introduces memory leak when cache is stomped
> > without freeing cache created by a competing thread.
> > I think something like the untested patch below should fix this.
>
> Yes, I did miss that - thanks. I think I missed a few other details too.
> I no longer think it can be safe to drop the lock without substantial
> rewrites - and even then maybe not.
>
> So I'm considering a different approach.
> This patch demonstrates what I'm thinking, though it still needs work I
> think.
I like this direction.
I always thought that we need to get rid of this vfs lookup
inside readdir but I thought it would be a lot of work.
Your suggestion walks around this in an elegant way.
>
> Thanks,
> NeilBrown
>
> From: NeilBrown <neil@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [PATCH] ovl: stop using lookup_one() in iterate_shared() handling.
>
> lookup_one() is expected to be removed as it does not fit well with
> proposed changes to directory locking.
> Specifically d_alloc_parallel() will be ordered outside of i_rwsem
> and as iterate_shared() is called with i_rwsem held it is not safe
> to call d_alloc_parallel().
>
> We can instead call d_alloc_noblock() and then call the ->lookup, but
> that can fail if there is a lookup attempt concurrent with the
> readdir().
>
> ovl cannot afford for the lookup to fail as that could produce incorrect
> results, and it cannot safely drop i_rwsem temporarily and that could
> introduce races with handling of the directory cache.
>
> Instead we rely on the fact that ovl_iterate() has an exclusive lock on
> the directory, so any concurrent lookup will wait for the ovl_iterate()
> call to complete. We allocate a separate dentry and if the lookup is
> successful, it is hashed with the result.
>
> When the concurrent lookup gets i_rwsem it mustn't do its own lookup -
> it must use the existing dentry. This is done using
> try_lookup_noperm(). To manage overheads we keep a counter of the
> number of "Stray dentries" there might be on each directory and only
> check for one when this count is non zero.
>
> If a 'stray dentry' were discarded for any reason before the concurrent
> lookup completed, the count would never reach zero. That might be a problem.
Can we deal with the discarded dentries using OVL_E_FLAGS() for
a stray ovl dentry implement the relevant ovl_dentry_operations to decrement
the stray counter?
Thanks,
Amir.
>
> Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neil@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/overlayfs/namei.c | 12 ++++++++++++
> fs/overlayfs/ovl_entry.h | 1 +
> fs/overlayfs/readdir.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> fs/overlayfs/super.c | 1 +
> 4 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/overlayfs/namei.c b/fs/overlayfs/namei.c
> index d8dd4b052984..c3ff57047712 100644
> --- a/fs/overlayfs/namei.c
> +++ b/fs/overlayfs/namei.c
> @@ -1399,6 +1399,18 @@ struct dentry *ovl_lookup(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry,
> if (dentry->d_name.len > ofs->namelen)
> return ERR_PTR(-ENAMETOOLONG);
>
> + if (atomic_read(&OVL_I(dir)->stray_dentries) && d_in_lookup(dentry)) {
> + /* This dentry might have forced readdir to do the lookup */
> + struct dentry *alias =
> + try_lookup_noperm(&QSTR_LEN(dentry->d_name.name,
> + dentry->d_name.len),
> + dentry->d_parent);
> + if (alias && !IS_ERR(alias)) {
> + atomic_dec(&OVL_I(dir)->stray_dentries);
> + return alias;
> + }
> + }
> +
> with_ovl_creds(dentry->d_sb)
> err = ovl_lookup_layers(&ctx, &d);
>
> diff --git a/fs/overlayfs/ovl_entry.h b/fs/overlayfs/ovl_entry.h
> index 1d4828dbcf7a..0e7751d5dfca 100644
> --- a/fs/overlayfs/ovl_entry.h
> +++ b/fs/overlayfs/ovl_entry.h
> @@ -172,6 +172,7 @@ struct ovl_inode {
> struct inode vfs_inode;
> struct dentry *__upperdentry;
> struct ovl_entry *oe;
> + atomic_t stray_dentries; /* directory */
>
> /* synchronize copy up and more */
> struct mutex lock;
> diff --git a/fs/overlayfs/readdir.c b/fs/overlayfs/readdir.c
> index 1dcc75b3a90f..add556a0a2b6 100644
> --- a/fs/overlayfs/readdir.c
> +++ b/fs/overlayfs/readdir.c
> @@ -557,6 +557,7 @@ static int ovl_cache_update(const struct path *path, struct ovl_cache_entry *p,
> enum ovl_path_type type;
> u64 ino = p->real_ino;
> int xinobits = ovl_xino_bits(ofs);
> + bool did_alloc = false;
> int err = 0;
>
> if (!ovl_same_dev(ofs) && !p->check_xwhiteout)
> @@ -574,8 +575,29 @@ static int ovl_cache_update(const struct path *path, struct ovl_cache_entry *p,
> }
> }
> /* This checks also for xwhiteouts */
> - this = lookup_one(mnt_idmap(path->mnt), &QSTR_LEN(p->name, p->len), dir);
> - if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(this) || !this->d_inode) {
> + this = d_alloc_noblock(dir, &QSTR_LEN(p->name, p->len));
> + if (this == ERR_PTR(-EWOULDBLOCK)) {
> + /*
> + * Some other thread is looking up this name and will block
> + * on i_rwsem before they can complete the lookup.
> + * We will do the lookup and when that lookup gets a turn it
> + * will return this dentry.
> + */
> + this = d_alloc_name(dir, p->name);
> + did_alloc = true;
> + }
> + if (!IS_ERR(this) && !d_unhashed(this)) {
> + /* Either we got in-lookup or we made our own unhashed */
> + struct dentry *alias = ovl_lookup(dir->d_inode, this, 0);
> + if (alias) {
> + d_lookup_done(this);
> + dput(this);
> + this = alias;
> + } else if (did_alloc) {
> + atomic_inc(&OVL_I(dir->d_inode)->stray_dentries);
> + }
> + }
> + if (IS_ERR(this) || !this->d_inode) {
> /* Mark a stale entry */
> p->is_whiteout = true;
> if (IS_ERR(this)) {
> diff --git a/fs/overlayfs/super.c b/fs/overlayfs/super.c
> index d4c12feec039..172d3ac7d3e2 100644
> --- a/fs/overlayfs/super.c
> +++ b/fs/overlayfs/super.c
> @@ -195,6 +195,7 @@ static struct inode *ovl_alloc_inode(struct super_block *sb)
> oi->__upperdentry = NULL;
> oi->lowerdata_redirect = NULL;
> oi->oe = NULL;
> + atomic_set(&oi->stray_dentries, 0);
> mutex_init(&oi->lock);
>
> return &oi->vfs_inode;
> --
> 2.50.0.107.gf914562f5916.dirty
>