On 21.05.2016 00:22, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> While reviewing the filesystems that set FS_USERNS_MOUNT I spotted the
> bpf filesystem. Looking at the code I saw a broken usage of mount_ns
> with current->nsproxy->mnt_ns. As the code does not acquire a
> reference to the mount namespace it can not possibly be correct to
> store the mount namespace on the superblock as it does.
>
> Replace mount_ns with mount_nodev so that each mount of the bpf
> filesystem returns a distinct instance, and the code is not buggy.
>
> In discussion with Hannes Frederic Sowa it was reported that the use
> of mount_ns was an attempt to have one bpf instance per mount
> namespace, in an attempt to keep resources that pin resources from
> hiding. That intent simply does not work, the vfs is not built to
> allow that kind of behavior. Which means that the bpf filesystem
> really is buggy both semantically and in it's implemenation as it does
> not nor can it implement the original intent.
>
> This change is userspace visible, but my experience with similar
> filesystems leads me to believe nothing will break with a model of each
> mount of the bpf filesystem is distinct from all others.
>
> Fixes: b2197755b263 ("bpf: add support for persistent maps/progs")
> Cc: Hannes Frederic Sowa <han...@stressinduktion.org>
> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <dan...@iogearbox.net>
> Signed-off-by: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebied...@xmission.com>
Acked-by: Hannes Frederic Sowa <han...@stressinduktion.org>
Thanks Eric!
