When operating in SU or SU+J mode, ffs_syncvnode() might need to
instantiate other vnode by inode number while owning syncing vnode
lock. Typically this other vnode is the parent of our vnode, but due
to renames occuring right before fsync (or during fsync when we drop
the syncing vnode lock, see below) it might be no longer parent.
More, the called function flush_pagedep_deps() needs to lock other
vnode while owning the lock for vnode which owns the buffer, for which
the dependencies are flushed. This creates another instance of the
same LoR as was fixed in softdep_sync().
Put the generic code for safe relocking into new SU helper
get_parent_vp() and use it in flush_pagedep_deps(). The case for safe
relocking of two vnodes with undefined lock order was extracted into
vn helper vn_lock_pair().
Due to call sequence
ffs_syncvnode()->softdep_sync_buf()->flush_pagedep_deps(),
ffs_syncvnode() indicates with ERELOOKUP that passed vnode was
unlocked in process, and can return ENOENT if the passed vnode
reclaimed. All callers of the function were inspected.
Because UFS namei lookups store auxiliary information about directory
entry in in-memory directory inode, and this information is then used
by UFS code that creates/removed directory entry in the actual
mutating VOPs, it is critical that directory vnode lock is not dropped
between lookup and VOP. For softdep_prelink(), which ensures that
later link/unlink operation can proceed without overflowing the
journal, calls were moved to the place where it is safe to drop
processing VOP because mutations are not yet applied. Then, ERELOOKUP
causes restart of the whole VFS operation (typically VFS syscall) at
top level, including the re-lookup of the involved pathes. [Note that
we already do the same restart for failing calls to vn_start_write(),
so formally this patch does not introduce new behavior.]
Similarly, unsafe calls to fsync in snapshot creation code were
plugged. A possible view on these failures is that it does not make
sense to continue creating snapshot if the snapshot vnode was
reclaimed due to forced unmount.
It is possible that relock/ERELOOKUP situation occurs in
ffs_truncate() called from ufs_inactive(). In this case, dropping the
vnode lock is not safe. Detect the situation with VI_DOINGINACT and
reschedule inactivation by setting VI_OWEINACT. ufs_inactive()
rechecks VI_OWEINACT and avoids reclaiming vnode is truncation failed
this way.
In ffs_truncate(), allocation of the EOF block for partial truncation
is re-done after vnode is synced, since we cannot leave the buffer
locked through ffs_syncvnode().
In collaboration with: pho
Reviewed by: mckusick (previous version), markj
Tested by: markj (syzkaller), pho
Sponsored by: The FreeBSD Foundation
Differential revision: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D26136
8a1509e442