linux-kernel - [PATCH 29/30] configfs: dir.c fix possible recursive locking

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 17 Jan 2008 14:35:55 -0800
From:	Mark Fasheh <mark.fasheh@...cle.com>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	ocfs2-devel@....oracle.com, Joonwoo Park <joonwpark81@...il.com>
Subject: [PATCH 29/30] configfs: dir.c fix possible recursive locking

From: Joonwoo Park <joonwpark81@...il.com>

configfs_register_subsystem() with default_groups triggers recursive locking.
it seems that mutex_lock_nested is needed.

=============================================
[ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ]
2.6.24-rc6 #141
---------------------------------------------
swapper/1 is trying to acquire lock:
 (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#3){--..}, at: [<c40ca76f>] configfs_attach_group+0x4f/0x190

but task is already holding lock:
 (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#3){--..}, at: [<c40ca9d5>] configfs_register_subsystem+0x55/0x130

other info that might help us debug this:
1 lock held by swapper/1:
 #0:  (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#3){--..}, at: [<c40ca9d5>] configfs_register_subsystem+0x55/0x130

stack backtrace:
Pid: 1, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.24-rc6 #141
 [<c40053ba>] show_trace_log_lvl+0x1a/0x30
 [<c4005e82>] show_trace+0x12/0x20
 [<c400687e>] dump_stack+0x6e/0x80
 [<c404ec72>] __lock_acquire+0xe62/0x1120
 [<c404efb2>] lock_acquire+0x82/0xa0
 [<c43fdad8>] mutex_lock_nested+0x98/0x2e0
 [<c40ca76f>] configfs_attach_group+0x4f/0x190
 [<c40caa46>] configfs_register_subsystem+0xc6/0x130
 [<c45c8186>] init_netconsole+0x2b6/0x300
 [<c45a75f2>] kernel_init+0x142/0x320
 [<c4004fb3>] kernel_thread_helper+0x7/0x14
 =======================

Signed-off-by: Joonwoo Park <joonwpark81@...il.com>
Signed-off-by: Joel Becker <joel.becker@...cle.com>
Signed-off-by: Mark Fasheh <mark.fasheh@...cle.com>
---
 fs/configfs/dir.c |    5 +++--
 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/configfs/dir.c b/fs/configfs/dir.c
index 50ed691..a48dc7d 100644
--- a/fs/configfs/dir.c
+++ b/fs/configfs/dir.c
@@ -546,7 +546,7 @@ static int populate_groups(struct config_group *group)
 		 * That said, taking our i_mutex is closer to mkdir
 		 * emulation, and shouldn't hurt.
 		 */
-		mutex_lock(&dentry->d_inode->i_mutex);
+		mutex_lock_nested(&dentry->d_inode->i_mutex, I_MUTEX_CHILD);
 
 		for (i = 0; group->default_groups[i]; i++) {
 			new_group = group->default_groups[i];
@@ -1405,7 +1405,8 @@ int configfs_register_subsystem(struct configfs_subsystem *subsys)
 	sd = configfs_sb->s_root->d_fsdata;
 	link_group(to_config_group(sd->s_element), group);
 
-	mutex_lock(&configfs_sb->s_root->d_inode->i_mutex);
+	mutex_lock_nested(&configfs_sb->s_root->d_inode->i_mutex,
+			I_MUTEX_PARENT);
 
 	name.name = group->cg_item.ci_name;
 	name.len = strlen(name.name);
-- 
1.5.3.6

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/