Thread (78 messages) 78 messages, 14 authors, 2024-10-21

Re: [RFC PATCH v1 1/7] fs: Add inode_get_ino() and implement get_ino() for NFS

From: Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net>
Date: 2024-10-11 15:26:29
Also in: linux-fsdevel, linux-nfs

On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 11:27:45PM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
On 2024/10/11 20:04, Mickaël Salaün wrote:
quoted
On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 07:12:17PM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
quoted
On 2024/10/11 0:26, Mickaël Salaün wrote:
quoted
When a filesystem manages its own inode numbers, like NFS's fileid shown
to user space with getattr(), other part of the kernel may still expose
the private inode->ino through kernel logs and audit.
I can't catch what you are trying to do. What is wrong with that?
My understanding is that tomoyo_get_attributes() is used to log or
expose access requests to user space, including inode numbers.  Is that
correct?  If yes, then the inode numbers might not reflect what user
space sees with stat(2).
Several questions because I've never seen inode number beyond UINT_MAX...

Since "struct inode"->i_ino is "unsigned long" (which is 32bits on 32-bit
architectures), despite stat(2) is ready to receive inode number as 64bits,
filesystems (except NFS) did not use inode numbers beyond UINT_MAX until now
so that fs/stat.c will not hit -EOVERFLOW condition, and that resulted in
misuse of %lu for e.g. audit logs?
Yes, I think other filesystems (e.g. tmpfs) only enable 64-bit inodes on
64-bit architectures.
But NFS was already using inode numbers beyond UINT_MAX, and e.g. audit logs
had been recording incorrect values when NFS is used?
Correct, all the logs with NFS inodes are wrong.
Or, some filesystems are already using inode numbers beyond UINT_MAX but the
capacity limitation on 32-bit architectures practically prevented users from
creating/mounting filesystems with so many inodes enough to require inode
numbers going beyond UINT_MAX?
I think so but I didn't take a look at all other filesystems.


You are trying to fix out-of-sync between stat(2) and e.g. audit logs
rather than introducing new feature, aren't you?
Yes
Then, what you are trying to do is OK, but TOMOYO side needs more changes.
Since TOMOYO is currently handling any numeric values (e.g. uid, gid, device
major/minor number, inode number, ioctl's cmd number) as "unsigned long",
most of "unsigned long" usage in TOMOYO needs to be updated to use "u64"
because you are about to change inode number values to always-64bits.
OK, could you please send a full patch in reply to this email?  I'll
include it in the next patch series.
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help