[PATCH] rust: file: handle fd table teardown in file descriptor APIs

[PATCH] rust: file: handle fd table teardown in file descriptor APIs

[Georgios Androutsopoulos]

Several Rust file descriptor APIs rely on `current->files` being
available. However, `exit_files()` clears it while execution may still
continue on the same task.

This affects `LocalFile::fget()` and the
`FileDescriptorReservation` operations that call
`get_unused_fd_flags()`, `fd_install()`, and `put_unused_fd()`.
`FileDescriptorReservation` cannot cross task boundaries, but remaining
on the same task does not guarantee that `current->files` is still
available when these operations are performed.

Guard the affected operations against a missing `current->files`.
`LocalFile::fget()` returns `EBADF` and
`FileDescriptorReservation::get_unused_fd_flags()` returns `EMFILE`.
For the infallible `fd_install()` and drop paths, warn once and avoid
calling the corresponding C helper when the fd table is already gone.

This prevents NULL dereferences through these safe Rust APIs after
`exit_files()`.

Fixes: 851849824bb5 ("rust: file: add Rust abstraction for `struct file`")
Fixes: 5da9857b127e ("rust: file: add `FileDescriptorReservation`")
Closes: https://github.com/Rust-for-Linux/linux/issues/1256
Signed-off-by: Georgios Androutsopoulos <georgeandrout13@gmail.com>
---
 rust/kernel/fs/file.rs | 69 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
 1 file changed, 60 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

diff --git a/rust/kernel/fs/file.rs b/rust/kernel/fs/file.rs
index 23ee689bd240..559f0985b12c 100644
--- a/rust/kernel/fs/file.rs
+++ b/rust/kernel/fs/file.rs
@@ -260,7 +260,17 @@ impl LocalFile {
     /// [`assume_no_fdget_pos`]: LocalFile::assume_no_fdget_pos
     #[inline]
     pub fn fget(fd: u32) -> Result<ARef<LocalFile>, BadFdError> {
-        // SAFETY: FFI call, there are no requirements on `fd`.
+        let current = crate::current!();
+
+        // SAFETY: `current` points to the currently executing task, so it is
+        // valid to read its `files` pointer. The pointer may be null during
+        // task teardown.
+        if unsafe { (*current.as_ptr()).files.is_null() } {
+            return Err(BadFdError);
+        }
+
+        // SAFETY: There are no requirements on `fd`. We checked above that the
+        // current task still has a file descriptor table, which `fget` accesses.
         let ptr = ptr::NonNull::new(unsafe { bindings::fget(fd) }).ok_or(BadFdError)?;
 
         // SAFETY: `bindings::fget` created a refcount, and we pass ownership of it to the `ARef`.
@@ -403,7 +413,18 @@ impl FileDescriptorReservation {
     /// Creates a new file descriptor reservation.
     #[inline]
     pub fn get_unused_fd_flags(flags: u32) -> Result<Self> {
-        // SAFETY: FFI call, there are no safety requirements on `flags`.
+        let current = crate::current!();
+
+        // SAFETY: `current` points to the currently executing task, so it is
+        // valid to read its `files` pointer. The pointer may be null during
+        // task teardown.
+        if unsafe { (*current.as_ptr()).files.is_null() } {
+            return Err(EMFILE);
+        }
+
+        // SAFETY: There are no safety requirements on `flags`. We checked above
+        // that the current task still has a file descriptor table, which
+        // `get_unused_fd_flags` accesses.
         let fd: i32 = unsafe { bindings::get_unused_fd_flags(flags) };
         to_result(fd)?;
 
@@ -421,13 +442,30 @@ pub fn reserved_fd(&self) -> u32 {
 
     /// Commits the reservation.
     ///
-    /// The previously reserved file descriptor is bound to `file`. This method consumes the
-    /// [`FileDescriptorReservation`], so it will not be usable after this call.
+    /// The previously reserved file descriptor is bound to `file`. If the current task no longer
+    /// has a file descriptor table, the reservation is abandoned instead. This method consumes the
+    /// [`FileDescriptorReservation`] in either case.
     #[inline]
     pub fn fd_install(self, file: ARef<File>) {
-        // SAFETY: `self.fd` was previously returned by `get_unused_fd_flags`. We have not yet used
-        // the fd, so it is still valid, and `current` still refers to the same task, as this type
-        // cannot be moved across task boundaries.
+        let current = crate::current!();
+
+        // SAFETY: `current` points to the currently executing task, so it is
+        // valid to read its `files` pointer. The pointer may be null during
+        // task teardown.
+        if unsafe { (*current.as_ptr()).files.is_null() } {
+            crate::pr_warn_once!(
+                "FileDescriptorReservation::fd_install called with current->files == NULL\n"
+            );
+
+            // `put_unused_fd` also requires `current->files` to be valid, so do not run
+            // the reservation's destructor after the current task has lost its fd table.
+            core::mem::forget(self);
+            return;
+        }
+
+        // SAFETY: `self.fd` was previously returned by `get_unused_fd_flags` and has not yet been
+        // used. This type cannot be moved across task boundaries, so `current` still refers to the
+        // same task, and we checked above that it still has an fd table.
         //
         // Furthermore, the file pointer is guaranteed to own a refcount by its type invariants,
         // and we take ownership of that refcount by not running the destructor below.
@@ -446,9 +484,22 @@ pub fn fd_install(self, file: ARef<File>) {
 impl Drop for FileDescriptorReservation {
     #[inline]
     fn drop(&mut self) {
+        let current = crate::current!();
+
+        // SAFETY: `current` points to the currently executing task, so it is
+        // valid to read its `files` pointer. The pointer may be null during
+        // task teardown.
+        if unsafe { (*current.as_ptr()).files.is_null() } {
+            crate::pr_warn_once!(
+                "FileDescriptorReservation dropped with current->files == NULL\n"
+            );
+            return;
+        }
+
         // SAFETY: By the type invariants of this type, `self.fd` was previously returned by
-        // `get_unused_fd_flags`. We have not yet used the fd, so it is still valid, and `current`
-        // still refers to the same task, as this type cannot be moved across task boundaries.
+        // `get_unused_fd_flags` and has not yet been used. This type cannot be moved across task
+        // boundaries, so `current` still refers to the same task, and we checked above that it
+        // still has an fd table.
         unsafe { bindings::put_unused_fd(self.fd) };
     }
 }
-- 
2.47.3

Re: [PATCH] rust: file: handle fd table teardown in file descriptor APIs

[Gary Guo]

On Sun Sep 20, 2026 at 9:01 PM BST, Georgios Androutsopoulos wrote:
> Several Rust file descriptor APIs rely on `current->files` being
> available. However, `exit_files()` clears it while execution may still
> continue on the same task.
>
> This affects `LocalFile::fget()` and the
> `FileDescriptorReservation` operations that call
> `get_unused_fd_flags()`, `fd_install()`, and `put_unused_fd()`.
> `FileDescriptorReservation` cannot cross task boundaries, but remaining
> on the same task does not guarantee that `current->files` is still
> available when these operations are performed.
>
> Guard the affected operations against a missing `current->files`.
> `LocalFile::fget()` returns `EBADF` and
> `FileDescriptorReservation::get_unused_fd_flags()` returns `EMFILE`.
> For the infallible `fd_install()` and drop paths, warn once and avoid
> calling the corresponding C helper when the fd table is already gone.
>
> This prevents NULL dereferences through these safe Rust APIs after
> `exit_files()`.

I suppose we could add these checks to C side instead, although perhaps one may
say "its bad caller code and not worth checking"?

So having these checks on Rust side is okay to me.

>
> Fixes: 851849824bb5 ("rust: file: add Rust abstraction for `struct file`")
> Fixes: 5da9857b127e ("rust: file: add `FileDescriptorReservation`")
> Closes: https://github.com/Rust-for-Linux/linux/issues/1256
> Signed-off-by: Georgios Androutsopoulos <georgeandrout13@gmail.com>
> ---
>  rust/kernel/fs/file.rs | 69 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
>  1 file changed, 60 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/rust/kernel/fs/file.rs b/rust/kernel/fs/file.rs
> index 23ee689bd240..559f0985b12c 100644
> --- a/rust/kernel/fs/file.rs
> +++ b/rust/kernel/fs/file.rs
> @@ -260,7 +260,17 @@ impl LocalFile {
>      /// [`assume_no_fdget_pos`]: LocalFile::assume_no_fdget_pos
>      #[inline]
>      pub fn fget(fd: u32) -> Result<ARef<LocalFile>, BadFdError> {
> -        // SAFETY: FFI call, there are no requirements on `fd`.
> +        let current = crate::current!();
> +
> +        // SAFETY: `current` points to the currently executing task, so it is
> +        // valid to read its `files` pointer. The pointer may be null during
> +        // task teardown.
> +        if unsafe { (*current.as_ptr()).files.is_null() } {
> +            return Err(BadFdError);
> +        }

I think we want to add `unlikely()` on them (which is being added by
https://lore.kernel.org/rust-for-linux/20260406095820.465994-2-ojeda@kernel.org/).

> +
> +        // SAFETY: There are no requirements on `fd`. We checked above that the
> +        // current task still has a file descriptor table, which `fget` accesses.
>          let ptr = ptr::NonNull::new(unsafe { bindings::fget(fd) }).ok_or(BadFdError)?;
>  
>          // SAFETY: `bindings::fget` created a refcount, and we pass ownership of it to the `ARef`.
> @@ -403,7 +413,18 @@ impl FileDescriptorReservation {
>      /// Creates a new file descriptor reservation.
>      #[inline]
>      pub fn get_unused_fd_flags(flags: u32) -> Result<Self> {
> -        // SAFETY: FFI call, there are no safety requirements on `flags`.
> +        let current = crate::current!();
> +
> +        // SAFETY: `current` points to the currently executing task, so it is
> +        // valid to read its `files` pointer. The pointer may be null during
> +        // task teardown.
> +        if unsafe { (*current.as_ptr()).files.is_null() } {
> +            return Err(EMFILE);
> +        }
> +
> +        // SAFETY: There are no safety requirements on `flags`. We checked above
> +        // that the current task still has a file descriptor table, which
> +        // `get_unused_fd_flags` accesses.
>          let fd: i32 = unsafe { bindings::get_unused_fd_flags(flags) };
>          to_result(fd)?;
>  
> @@ -421,13 +442,30 @@ pub fn reserved_fd(&self) -> u32 {
>  
>      /// Commits the reservation.
>      ///
> -    /// The previously reserved file descriptor is bound to `file`. This method consumes the
> -    /// [`FileDescriptorReservation`], so it will not be usable after this call.
> +    /// The previously reserved file descriptor is bound to `file`. If the current task no longer
> +    /// has a file descriptor table, the reservation is abandoned instead. This method consumes the
> +    /// [`FileDescriptorReservation`] in either case.
>      #[inline]
>      pub fn fd_install(self, file: ARef<File>) {
> -        // SAFETY: `self.fd` was previously returned by `get_unused_fd_flags`. We have not yet used
> -        // the fd, so it is still valid, and `current` still refers to the same task, as this type
> -        // cannot be moved across task boundaries.
> +        let current = crate::current!();
> +
> +        // SAFETY: `current` points to the currently executing task, so it is
> +        // valid to read its `files` pointer. The pointer may be null during
> +        // task teardown.
> +        if unsafe { (*current.as_ptr()).files.is_null() } {
> +            crate::pr_warn_once!(
> +                "FileDescriptorReservation::fd_install called with current->files == NULL\n"
> +            );

I wonder if we should upgrade this to `WARN_ONCE`. As code being executed when
exiting are cleanup code, for this code path to be hit, it would mean that some
code is installing FD descriptor while being dropped -- which is likely a bug.

Putting a "BTW, some Rust code is installing a FD when process is exiting" in
dmesg is not going to be useful to understand what's going on. We'd want a full
backtrace.

On the other hand, dropping a `FileDescriptorReservation` is a more realistic,
so we perhaps might even want to declare it being okay (see below).

> +
> +            // `put_unused_fd` also requires `current->files` to be valid, so do not run
> +            // the reservation's destructor after the current task has lost its fd table.
> +            core::mem::forget(self);
> +            return;
> +        }
> +
> +        // SAFETY: `self.fd` was previously returned by `get_unused_fd_flags` and has not yet been
> +        // used. This type cannot be moved across task boundaries, so `current` still refers to the
> +        // same task, and we checked above that it still has an fd table.
>          //
>          // Furthermore, the file pointer is guaranteed to own a refcount by its type invariants,
>          // and we take ownership of that refcount by not running the destructor below.
> @@ -446,9 +484,22 @@ pub fn fd_install(self, file: ARef<File>) {
>  impl Drop for FileDescriptorReservation {
>      #[inline]
>      fn drop(&mut self) {
> +        let current = crate::current!();
> +
> +        // SAFETY: `current` points to the currently executing task, so it is
> +        // valid to read its `files` pointer. The pointer may be null during
> +        // task teardown.
> +        if unsafe { (*current.as_ptr()).files.is_null() } {
> +            crate::pr_warn_once!(
> +                "FileDescriptorReservation dropped with current->files == NULL\n"
> +            );

I think we can remove this warning. Skipping put_unused_fd isn't actually
leaking anything as the files_struct is cleaned up.

Best,
Gary


> +            return;
> +        }
> +
>          // SAFETY: By the type invariants of this type, `self.fd` was previously returned by
> -        // `get_unused_fd_flags`. We have not yet used the fd, so it is still valid, and `current`
> -        // still refers to the same task, as this type cannot be moved across task boundaries.
> +        // `get_unused_fd_flags` and has not yet been used. This type cannot be moved across task
> +        // boundaries, so `current` still refers to the same task, and we checked above that it
> +        // still has an fd table.
>          unsafe { bindings::put_unused_fd(self.fd) };
>      }
>  }

Re: [PATCH] rust: file: handle fd table teardown in file descriptor APIs

[Georgios Androutsopoulos]

On Sun, Sep 20, 2026 at 4:48 PM Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net> wrote:
> I think we want to add `unlikely()` on them (which is being added by
> https://lore.kernel.org/rust-for-linux/20260406095820.465994-2-ojeda@kernel.org/).

I checked current `linux-next` and `rust-next`, but this does not seem to
have landed yet. Should I leave these as regular checks for now and add a
`TODO:` to use `unlikely()` once it is available?

> I wonder if we should upgrade this to `WARN_ONCE`. As code being executed when
> exiting are cleanup code, for this code path to be hit, it would mean that some
> code is installing FD descriptor while being dropped -- which is likely a bug.
>
> Putting a "BTW, some Rust code is installing a FD when process is exiting" in
> dmesg is not going to be useful to understand what's going on. We'd want a full
> backtrace.

`WARN_ONCE` does not seem to be available on the Rust side yet either.
`warn_on!()` is available on the current base and would give us the
backtrace. Would you prefer using that here for now?

> I think we can remove this warning. Skipping put_unused_fd isn't actually
> leaking anything as the files_struct is cleaned up.

Agreed. I'll treat dropping the reservation after fd table teardown as
normal cleanup, skip `put_unused_fd()`, and document that this can happen.

Best,
George

Re: [PATCH] rust: file: handle fd table teardown in file descriptor APIs

[Gary Guo]

On Tue Sep 22, 2026 at 7:30 PM BST, Georgios Androutsopoulos wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 20, 2026 at 4:48 PM Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net> wrote:
>> I think we want to add `unlikely()` on them (which is being added by
>> https://lore.kernel.org/rust-for-linux/20260406095820.465994-2-ojeda@kernel.org/).
>
> I checked current `linux-next` and `rust-next`, but this does not seem to
> have landed yet. Should I leave these as regular checks for now and add a
> `TODO:` to use `unlikely()` once it is available?

Regular checks are fine, no need for TODO either. Just bring this up to nudge
Miguel to pick the patch :)

>
>> I wonder if we should upgrade this to `WARN_ONCE`. As code being executed when
>> exiting are cleanup code, for this code path to be hit, it would mean that some
>> code is installing FD descriptor while being dropped -- which is likely a bug.
>>
>> Putting a "BTW, some Rust code is installing a FD when process is exiting" in
>> dmesg is not going to be useful to understand what's going on. We'd want a full
>> backtrace.
>
> `WARN_ONCE` does not seem to be available on the Rust side yet either.
> `warn_on!()` is available on the current base and would give us the
> backtrace. Would you prefer using that here for now?

I would prefer `warn_on!()`.

Best,
Gary

>
>> I think we can remove this warning. Skipping put_unused_fd isn't actually
>> leaking anything as the files_struct is cleaned up.
>
> Agreed. I'll treat dropping the reservation after fd table teardown as
> normal cleanup, skip `put_unused_fd()`, and document that this can happen.
>
> Best,
> George

Re: [PATCH] rust: file: handle fd table teardown in file descriptor APIs

[Christian Brauner]

On Sun, Sep 20, 2026 at 09:48:54PM +0100, Gary Guo wrote:
> On Sun Sep 20, 2026 at 9:01 PM BST, Georgios Androutsopoulos wrote:
> > Several Rust file descriptor APIs rely on `current->files` being
> > available. However, `exit_files()` clears it while execution may still
> > continue on the same task.
> >
> > This affects `LocalFile::fget()` and the
> > `FileDescriptorReservation` operations that call
> > `get_unused_fd_flags()`, `fd_install()`, and `put_unused_fd()`.
> > `FileDescriptorReservation` cannot cross task boundaries, but remaining
> > on the same task does not guarantee that `current->files` is still
> > available when these operations are performed.
> >
> > Guard the affected operations against a missing `current->files`.
> > `LocalFile::fget()` returns `EBADF` and
> > `FileDescriptorReservation::get_unused_fd_flags()` returns `EMFILE`.
> > For the infallible `fd_install()` and drop paths, warn once and avoid
> > calling the corresponding C helper when the fd table is already gone.
> >
> > This prevents NULL dereferences through these safe Rust APIs after
> > `exit_files()`.
> 
> I suppose we could add these checks to C side instead, although perhaps one may
> say "its bad caller code and not worth checking"?

It is a bug to call fd_install() or anything like that post
exit_files(). Whatever code is doing that needs to get fixed.

Similarly it is a bug to call fd_install() on kernel thread which do not
have files at all. So whoever you're doing this for is breaching core
api assumptions big time and I would like a detailed explanation
otherwise I see no reason to merge this.