Skip to content
Snippets Groups Projects
Forked from gfx-ci / linux
Source project has a limited visibility.
  • Christian Brauner's avatar
    3b832035
    Revert "fs: don't block i_writecount during exec" · 3b832035
    Christian Brauner authored
    This reverts commit 2a010c41.
    
    Rui Ueyama <rui314@gmail.com> writes:
    
    > I'm the creator and the maintainer of the mold linker
    > (https://github.com/rui314/mold). Recently, we discovered that mold
    > started causing process crashes in certain situations due to a change
    > in the Linux kernel. Here are the details:
    >
    > - In general, overwriting an existing file is much faster than
    > creating an empty file and writing to it on Linux, so mold attempts to
    > reuse an existing executable file if it exists.
    >
    > - If a program is running, opening the executable file for writing
    > previously failed with ETXTBSY. If that happens, mold falls back to
    > creating a new file.
    >
    > - However, the Linux kernel recently changed the behavior so that
    > writing to an executable file is now always permitted
    > (https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=2a010c412853).
    >
    > That caused mold to write to an executable file even if there's a
    > process running that file. Since changes to mmap'ed files are
    > immediately visible to other processes, any processes running that
    > file would almost certainly crash in a very mysterious way.
    > Identifying the cause of these random crashes took us a few days.
    >
    > Rejecting writes to an executable file that is currently running is a
    > well-known behavior, and Linux had operated that way for a very long
    > time. So, I don’t believe relying on this behavior was our mistake;
    > rather, I see this as a regression in the Linux kernel.
    
    Quoting myself from commit 2a010c41 ("fs: don't block i_writecount during exec")
    
    > Yes, someone in userspace could potentially be relying on this. It's not
    > completely out of the realm of possibility but let's find out if that's
    > actually the case and not guess.
    
    It seems we found out that someone is relying on this obscure behavior.
    So revert the change.
    
    Link: https://github.com/rui314/mold/issues/1361
    Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/4a2bc207-76be-4715-8e12-7fc45a76a125@leemhuis.info
    
    
    Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
    Signed-off-by: default avatarChristian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
    3b832035
    History
    Revert "fs: don't block i_writecount during exec"
    Christian Brauner authored
    This reverts commit 2a010c41.
    
    Rui Ueyama <rui314@gmail.com> writes:
    
    > I'm the creator and the maintainer of the mold linker
    > (https://github.com/rui314/mold). Recently, we discovered that mold
    > started causing process crashes in certain situations due to a change
    > in the Linux kernel. Here are the details:
    >
    > - In general, overwriting an existing file is much faster than
    > creating an empty file and writing to it on Linux, so mold attempts to
    > reuse an existing executable file if it exists.
    >
    > - If a program is running, opening the executable file for writing
    > previously failed with ETXTBSY. If that happens, mold falls back to
    > creating a new file.
    >
    > - However, the Linux kernel recently changed the behavior so that
    > writing to an executable file is now always permitted
    > (https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=2a010c412853).
    >
    > That caused mold to write to an executable file even if there's a
    > process running that file. Since changes to mmap'ed files are
    > immediately visible to other processes, any processes running that
    > file would almost certainly crash in a very mysterious way.
    > Identifying the cause of these random crashes took us a few days.
    >
    > Rejecting writes to an executable file that is currently running is a
    > well-known behavior, and Linux had operated that way for a very long
    > time. So, I don’t believe relying on this behavior was our mistake;
    > rather, I see this as a regression in the Linux kernel.
    
    Quoting myself from commit 2a010c41 ("fs: don't block i_writecount during exec")
    
    > Yes, someone in userspace could potentially be relying on this. It's not
    > completely out of the realm of possibility but let's find out if that's
    > actually the case and not guess.
    
    It seems we found out that someone is relying on this obscure behavior.
    So revert the change.
    
    Link: https://github.com/rui314/mold/issues/1361
    Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/4a2bc207-76be-4715-8e12-7fc45a76a125@leemhuis.info
    
    
    Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
    Signed-off-by: default avatarChristian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>