Commit 16b52bbe authored by Amir Goldstein's avatar Amir Goldstein Committed by Al Viro

kernfs: annotate different lockdep class for of->mutex of writable files

The writable file /sys/power/resume may call vfs lookup helpers for
arbitrary paths and readonly files can be read by overlayfs from vfs
helpers when sysfs is a lower layer of overalyfs.

To avoid a lockdep warning of circular dependency between overlayfs
inode lock and kernfs of->mutex, use a different lockdep class for
writable and readonly kernfs files.

Reported-by: syzbot+9a5b0ced8b1bfb238b56@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Fixes: 0fedefd4 ("kernfs: sysfs: support custom llseek method for sysfs entries")
Suggested-by: default avatarAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Signed-off-by: default avatarAmir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarAl Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
parent fec50db7
...@@ -636,11 +636,18 @@ static int kernfs_fop_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file) ...@@ -636,11 +636,18 @@ static int kernfs_fop_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
* each file a separate locking class. Let's differentiate on * each file a separate locking class. Let's differentiate on
* whether the file has mmap or not for now. * whether the file has mmap or not for now.
* *
* Both paths of the branch look the same. They're supposed to * For similar reasons, writable and readonly files are given different
* lockdep key, because the writable file /sys/power/resume may call vfs
* lookup helpers for arbitrary paths and readonly files can be read by
* overlayfs from vfs helpers when sysfs is a lower layer of overalyfs.
*
* All three cases look the same. They're supposed to
* look that way and give @of->mutex different static lockdep keys. * look that way and give @of->mutex different static lockdep keys.
*/ */
if (has_mmap) if (has_mmap)
mutex_init(&of->mutex); mutex_init(&of->mutex);
else if (file->f_mode & FMODE_WRITE)
mutex_init(&of->mutex);
else else
mutex_init(&of->mutex); mutex_init(&of->mutex);
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment