linux-kernel - Re: 3.4+ tty lockdep trace

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:	Wed, 23 May 2012 09:06:22 +0800
From:	Ming Lei <tom.leiming@...il.com>
To:	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...ux.intel.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: 3.4+ tty lockdep trace

Hi Dave,

On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 8:26 AM, Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com> wrote:
> From v3.4-4413-gfb09baf
>
> [   43.374948] =============================================
> [   43.374991] [ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ]
> [   43.375035] 3.4.0+ #24 Not tainted
> [   43.375065] ---------------------------------------------
> [   43.375108] sshd/639 is trying to acquire lock:
> [   43.375157]  (&tty->legacy_mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff81656d57>] tty_lock+0x37/0x80
> [   43.375216]
> [   43.375216] but task is already holding lock:
> [   43.375268]  (&tty->legacy_mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff81656d57>] tty_lock+0x37/0x80
> [   43.375327]
> [   43.375327] other info that might help us debug this:
> [   43.375378]  Possible unsafe locking scenario:
> [   43.375378]
> [   43.375425]        CPU0
> [   43.375447]        ----
> [   43.375471]   lock(&tty->legacy_mutex);
> [   43.375504]   lock(&tty->legacy_mutex);
> [   43.375536]
> [   43.375536]  *** DEADLOCK ***
> [   43.375536]
> [   43.375583]  May be due to missing lock nesting notation
> [   43.375583]
> [   43.375637] 2 locks held by sshd/639:
> [   43.375675]  #0:  (tty_mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff813b0243>] tty_release+0x1c3/0x5d0
> [   43.375740]  #1:  (&tty->legacy_mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff81656d57>] tty_lock+0x37/0x80
> [   43.375802]
> [   43.375802] stack backtrace:
> [   43.375841] Pid: 639, comm: sshd Not tainted 3.4.0+ #24
> [   43.375882] Call Trace:
> [   43.377572]  [<ffffffff810b4604>] __lock_acquire+0x1584/0x1aa0
> [   43.379286]  [<ffffffff810b51e2>] lock_acquire+0x92/0x1f0
> [   43.380995]  [<ffffffff81656d57>] ? tty_lock+0x37/0x80
> [   43.382700]  [<ffffffff816534f1>] mutex_lock_nested+0x71/0x3b0
> [   43.384403]  [<ffffffff81656d57>] ? tty_lock+0x37/0x80
> [   43.386094]  [<ffffffff81085521>] ? get_parent_ip+0x11/0x50
> [   43.387794]  [<ffffffff81656d57>] ? tty_lock+0x37/0x80
> [   43.389480]  [<ffffffff8165a68d>] ? sub_preempt_count+0x6d/0xd0
> [   43.391176]  [<ffffffff813b0243>] ? tty_release+0x1c3/0x5d0
> [   43.393003]  [<ffffffff81656d57>] tty_lock+0x37/0x80
> [   43.394867]  [<ffffffff81656dc3>] tty_lock_pair+0x23/0x5c
> [   43.396671]  [<ffffffff813b024e>] tty_release+0x1ce/0x5d0
> [   43.398462]  [<ffffffff811a765c>] fput+0x12c/0x300
> [   43.400292]  [<ffffffff811a23a9>] filp_close+0x69/0xa0
> [   43.402084]  [<ffffffff811a2f2d>] sys_close+0xad/0x1a0
> [   43.403871]  [<ffffffff8165e652>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b

We have one patch to address the problem, could you test it from the link below?

        http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=133765211309247&w=2


Thanks,
-- 
Ming Lei
--
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/