propagate_one(m) calculates "type" argument for copy_tree() like this:

>    if (m->mnt_group_id == last_dest->mnt_group_id) {
>        type = CL_MAKE_SHARED;
>    } else {
>        type = CL_SLAVE;
>        if (IS_MNT_SHARED(m))
>           type |= CL_MAKE_SHARED;
>   }

The "type" argument then governs clone_mnt() behavior with respect to flags
and mnt_master of new mount. When we iterate through a slave group, it is
possible that both current "m" and "last_dest" are not shared (although,
both are slaves, i.e. have non-NULL mnt_master-s). Then the comparison
above erroneously makes new mount shared and sets its mnt_master to
last_source->mnt_master. The patch fixes the problem by handling zero
mnt_group_id-s as though they are unequal.

The similar problem exists in the implementation of "else" clause above
when we have to ascend upward in the master/slave tree by calling:

>    last_source = last_source->mnt_master;
>    last_dest = last_source->mnt_parent;

proper number of times. The last step is governed by
"n->mnt_group_id != last_dest->mnt_group_id" condition that may lie if
both are zero. The patch fixes this case in the same way as the former one.

[AV: don't open-code an obvious helper...]

Signed-off-by: Maxim Patlasov <mpatlasov@virtuozzo.com>
Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

If the first mount in shared subtree is locked don't unmount the
shared subtree.

This is ensured by walking through the mounts parents before children
and marking a mount as unmountable if it is not locked or it is locked
but it's parent is marked.

This allows recursive mount detach to propagate through a set of
mounts when unmounting them would not reveal what is under any locked
mount.

Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>

A prerequisite of calling umount_tree is that the point where the tree
is mounted at is valid to unmount.

If we are propagating the effect of the unmount clear MNT_LOCKED in
every instance where the same filesystem is mounted on the same
mountpoint in the mount tree, as we know (by virtue of the fact
that umount_tree was called) that it is safe to reveal what
is at that mountpoint.

Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>

- Modify __lookup_mnt_hash_last to ignore mounts that have MNT_UMOUNTED set.
- Don't remove mounts from the mount hash table in propogate_umount
- Don't remove mounts from the mount hash table in umount_tree before
  the entire list of mounts to be umounted is selected.
- Remove mounts from the mount hash table as the last thing that
  happens in the case where a mount has a parent in umount_tree.
  Mounts without parents are not hashed (by definition).

This paves the way for delaying removal from the mount hash table even
farther and fixing the MNT_LOCKED vs MNT_DETACH issue.

Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>

In some instances it is necessary to know if the the unmounting
process has begun on a mount.  Add MNT_UMOUNT to make that reliably
testable.

This fix gets used in fixing locked mounts in MNT_DETACH

Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>

umount_tree builds a list of mounts that need to be unmounted.
Utilize mnt_list for this purpose instead of mnt_hash.  This begins to
allow keeping a mount on the mnt_hash after it is unmounted, which is
necessary for a properly functioning MNT_LOCKED implementation.

The fact that mnt_list is an ordinary list makding available list_move
is nice bonus.

Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>

Clear MNT_LOCKED in the callers of copy_tree except copy_mnt_ns, and
collect_mounts.  In copy_mnt_ns it is necessary to create an exact
copy of a mount tree, so not clearing MNT_LOCKED is important.
Similarly collect_mounts is used to take a snapshot of the mount tree
for audit logging purposes and auditing using a faithful copy of the
tree is important.

This becomes particularly significant when we start setting MNT_LOCKED
on rootfs to prevent it from being unmounted.

Signed-off-by: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>

The check in __propagate_umount() ("has somebody explicitly mounted
something on that slave?") is done *before* taking the already doomed
victims out of the child lists.

Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

The current mainline has copies propagated to *all* nodes, then
tears down the copies we made for nodes that do not contain
counterparts of the desired mountpoint.  That sets the right
propagation graph for the copies (at teardown time we move
the slaves of removed node to a surviving peer or directly
to master), but we end up paying a fairly steep price in
useless allocations.  It's fairly easy to create a situation
where N calls of mount(2) create exactly N bindings, with
O(N^2) vfsmounts allocated and freed in process.

Fortunately, it is possible to avoid those allocations/freeings.
The trick is to create copies in the right order and find which
one would've eventually become a master with the current algorithm.
It turns out to be possible in O(nodes getting propagation) time
and with no extra allocations at all.

One part is that we need to make sure that eventual master will be
created before its slaves, so we need to walk the propagation
tree in a different order - by peer groups.  And iterate through
the peers before dealing with the next group.

Another thing is finding the (earlier) copy that will be a master
of one we are about to create; to do that we are (temporary) marking
the masters of mountpoints we are attaching the copies to.

Either we are in a peer of the last mountpoint we'd dealt with,
or we have the following situation: we are attaching to mountpoint M,
the last copy S_0 had been attached to M_0 and there are sequences
S_0...S_n, M_0...M_n such that S_{i+1} is a master of S_{i},
S_{i} mounted on M{i} and we need to create a slave of the first S_{k}
such that M is getting propagation from M_{k}.  It means that the master
of M_{k} will be among the sequence of masters of M.  On the
other hand, the nearest marked node in that sequence will either
be the master of M_{k} or the master of M_{k-1} (the latter -
in the case if M_{k-1} is a slave of something M gets propagation
from, but in a wrong peer group).

So we go through the sequence of masters of M until we find
a marked one (P).  Let N be the one before it.  Then we go through
the sequence of masters of S_0 until we find one (say, S) mounted
on a node D that has P as master and check if D is a peer of N.
If it is, S will be the master of new copy, if not - the master of S
will be.

That's it for the hard part; the rest is fairly simple.  Iterator
is in next_group(), handling of one prospective mountpoint is
propagate_one().

It seems to survive all tests and gives a noticably better performance
than the current mainline for setups that are seriously using shared
subtrees.

Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

fixes RCU bug - walking through hlist is safe in face of element moves,
since it's self-terminating.  Cyclic lists are not - if we end up jumping
to another hash chain, we'll loop infinitely without ever hitting the
original list head.

[fix for dumb braino folded]

Spotted by: Max Kellermann <mk@cm4all.com>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>