[v3,1/3] splice: always fsnotify_access(in), fsnotify_modify(out) on success
Commit Message
The current behaviour caused an asymmetry where some write APIs
(write, sendfile) would notify the written-to/read-from objects,
but splice wouldn't.
This affected userspace which uses inotify, most notably coreutils
tail -f, to monitor pipes.
If the pipe buffer had been filled by a splice-family function:
* tail wouldn't know and thus wouldn't service the pipe, and
* all writes to the pipe would block because it's full,
thus service was denied.
(For the particular case of tail -f this could be worked around
with ---disable-inotify.)
Fixes: 983652c69199 ("splice: report related fsnotify events")
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/jbyihkyk5dtaohdwjyivambb2gffyjs3dodpofafnkkunxq7bu@jngkdxx65pux/t/#u
Link: https://bugs.debian.org/1039488
Signed-off-by: Ahelenia Ziemiańska <nabijaczleweli@nabijaczleweli.xyz>
Reviewed-by: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
---
fs/splice.c | 31 ++++++++++++++-----------------
1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
Comments
On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 7:55 PM Ahelenia Ziemiańska
<nabijaczleweli@nabijaczleweli.xyz> wrote:
>
> The current behaviour caused an asymmetry where some write APIs
> (write, sendfile) would notify the written-to/read-from objects,
> but splice wouldn't.
>
> This affected userspace which uses inotify, most notably coreutils
> tail -f, to monitor pipes.
> If the pipe buffer had been filled by a splice-family function:
> * tail wouldn't know and thus wouldn't service the pipe, and
> * all writes to the pipe would block because it's full,
> thus service was denied.
> (For the particular case of tail -f this could be worked around
> with ---disable-inotify.)
>
> Fixes: 983652c69199 ("splice: report related fsnotify events")
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/jbyihkyk5dtaohdwjyivambb2gffyjs3dodpofafnkkunxq7bu@jngkdxx65pux/t/#u
> Link: https://bugs.debian.org/1039488
> Signed-off-by: Ahelenia Ziemiańska <nabijaczleweli@nabijaczleweli.xyz>
> Reviewed-by: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
> ---
> fs/splice.c | 31 ++++++++++++++-----------------
> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/splice.c b/fs/splice.c
> index 3e06611d19ae..e16f4f032d2f 100644
> --- a/fs/splice.c
> +++ b/fs/splice.c
> @@ -1154,10 +1154,8 @@ long do_splice(struct file *in, loff_t *off_in, struct file *out,
> if ((in->f_flags | out->f_flags) & O_NONBLOCK)
> flags |= SPLICE_F_NONBLOCK;
>
> - return splice_pipe_to_pipe(ipipe, opipe, len, flags);
> - }
> -
> - if (ipipe) {
> + ret = splice_pipe_to_pipe(ipipe, opipe, len, flags);
> + } else if (ipipe) {
> if (off_in)
> return -ESPIPE;
> if (off_out) {
> @@ -1182,18 +1180,15 @@ long do_splice(struct file *in, loff_t *off_in, struct file *out,
> ret = do_splice_from(ipipe, out, &offset, len, flags);
> file_end_write(out);
>
> - if (ret > 0)
> - fsnotify_modify(out);
> -
> if (!off_out)
> out->f_pos = offset;
> else
> *off_out = offset;
>
> - return ret;
> - }
> -
> - if (opipe) {
> + // splice_write-> already marked out
> + // as modified via vfs_iter_write()
> + goto noaccessout;
> + } else if (opipe) {
> if (off_out)
> return -ESPIPE;
> if (off_in) {
> @@ -1209,18 +1204,20 @@ long do_splice(struct file *in, loff_t *off_in, struct file *out,
>
> ret = splice_file_to_pipe(in, opipe, &offset, len, flags);
>
> - if (ret > 0)
> - fsnotify_access(in);
> -
> if (!off_in)
> in->f_pos = offset;
> else
> *off_in = offset;
> + } else
> + return -EINVAL;
>
> - return ret;
> - }
> + if (ret > 0)
> + fsnotify_modify(out);
> +noaccessout:
> + if (ret > 0)
> + fsnotify_access(in);
>
As I wrote, I don't like this special case.
I prefer that we generate double IN_MODIFY than
having to maintain unreadable code.
Let's see what Jan has to say about this.
Thanks,
Amir.
On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 09:10:09PM +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 7:55 PM Ahelenia Ziemiańska
> <nabijaczleweli@nabijaczleweli.xyz> wrote:
> > @@ -1209,18 +1204,20 @@ long do_splice(struct file *in, loff_t *off_in, struct file *out,
> >
> > ret = splice_file_to_pipe(in, opipe, &offset, len, flags);
> >
> > - if (ret > 0)
> > - fsnotify_access(in);
> > -
> > if (!off_in)
> > in->f_pos = offset;
> > else
> > *off_in = offset;
> > + } else
> > + return -EINVAL;
> >
> > - return ret;
> > - }
> > + if (ret > 0)
> > + fsnotify_modify(out);
> > +noaccessout:
> > + if (ret > 0)
> > + fsnotify_access(in);
> >
> As I wrote, I don't like this special case.
> I prefer that we generate double IN_MODIFY than
> having to maintain unreadable code.
>
> Let's see what Jan has to say about this.
Yes, in principle I definitely agree, but I don't know what the official
policy is on (effectively-)spurious/duplicate events; neither the kernel
documentation nor the manual speak to the reliability of the signal,
so I defaulted to the variant I thought to be correcter, if filthy.
@@ -1154,10 +1154,8 @@ long do_splice(struct file *in, loff_t *off_in, struct file *out,
if ((in->f_flags | out->f_flags) & O_NONBLOCK)
flags |= SPLICE_F_NONBLOCK;
- return splice_pipe_to_pipe(ipipe, opipe, len, flags);
- }
-
- if (ipipe) {
+ ret = splice_pipe_to_pipe(ipipe, opipe, len, flags);
+ } else if (ipipe) {
if (off_in)
return -ESPIPE;
if (off_out) {
@@ -1182,18 +1180,15 @@ long do_splice(struct file *in, loff_t *off_in, struct file *out,
ret = do_splice_from(ipipe, out, &offset, len, flags);
file_end_write(out);
- if (ret > 0)
- fsnotify_modify(out);
-
if (!off_out)
out->f_pos = offset;
else
*off_out = offset;
- return ret;
- }
-
- if (opipe) {
+ // splice_write-> already marked out
+ // as modified via vfs_iter_write()
+ goto noaccessout;
+ } else if (opipe) {
if (off_out)
return -ESPIPE;
if (off_in) {
@@ -1209,18 +1204,20 @@ long do_splice(struct file *in, loff_t *off_in, struct file *out,
ret = splice_file_to_pipe(in, opipe, &offset, len, flags);
- if (ret > 0)
- fsnotify_access(in);
-
if (!off_in)
in->f_pos = offset;
else
*off_in = offset;
+ } else
+ return -EINVAL;
- return ret;
- }
+ if (ret > 0)
+ fsnotify_modify(out);
+noaccessout:
+ if (ret > 0)
+ fsnotify_access(in);
- return -EINVAL;
+ return ret;
}
static long __do_splice(struct file *in, loff_t __user *off_in,