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, 27 Feb 2013 10:17:04 +1100
From:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:	Mark Jackson <mpfj-list@...c.co.uk>
Cc:	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: linux-next: JFFS2 deadlock

Hi Mark,

On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 11:54:56 +0000 Mark Jackson <mpfj-list@...c.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Just tested the current next-20130226 on a custom AM335X board, and I received the JFFS2 deadlock shown below.

Is this new today?  is it reproducible? Does if ail for Linus' tree?

Al, could this be something to do with the new stuff in the vfs tree?

> Regards
> Mark JACKSON
> ---
> [    3.250349] jffs2: notice: (1) jffs2_build_xattr_subsystem: complete building xattr subsystem, 0 of xdatum (0 unchecked, 0 orphan) and 0 of xref (0 dead, 0 orphan) found.
> [    3.268364] VFS: Mounted root (jffs2 filesystem) readonly on device 31:6.
> [    3.277233] devtmpfs: mounted
> [    3.280982] Freeing init memory: 332K
> [    3.706697]
> [    3.708306] ======================================================
> [    3.714804] [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
> [    3.721398] 3.8.0-next-20130226-dirty #10 Not tainted
> [    3.726708] -------------------------------------------------------
> [    3.733297] rcS/686 is trying to acquire lock:
> [    3.737969]  (&mm->mmap_sem){++++++}, at: [<c00f0af4>] might_fault+0x3c/0x90
> [    3.745437]
> [    3.745437] but task is already holding lock:
> [    3.751569]  (&f->sem){+.+.+.}, at: [<c023d128>] jffs2_readdir+0x44/0x1a8
> [    3.758748]
> [    3.758748] which lock already depends on the new lock.
> [    3.758748]
> [    3.767348]
> [    3.767348] the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
> [    3.775215]
> -> #1 (&f->sem){+.+.+.}:
> [    3.779184]        [<c0092df0>] lock_acquire+0x9c/0x104
> [    3.784701]        [<c04b76e4>] mutex_lock_nested+0x3c/0x334
> [    3.790666]        [<c023d950>] jffs2_readpage+0x20/0x44
> [    3.796261]        [<c00d9d38>] __do_page_cache_readahead+0x2a0/0x2cc
> [    3.803050]        [<c00da004>] ra_submit+0x28/0x30
> [    3.808187]        [<c00d179c>] filemap_fault+0x304/0x458
> [    3.813884]        [<c00f0c58>] __do_fault+0x6c/0x490
> [    3.819203]        [<c00f3c5c>] handle_pte_fault+0xb0/0x6f0
> [    3.825071]        [<c00f433c>] handle_mm_fault+0xa0/0xd4
> [    3.830755]        [<c04bbdcc>] do_page_fault+0x2a0/0x3d4
> [    3.836449]        [<c000845c>] do_DataAbort+0x30/0x9c
> [    3.841861]        [<c04ba2a4>] __dabt_svc+0x44/0x80
> [    3.847089]        [<c0289c34>] __clear_user_std+0x1c/0x64
> [    3.852877]
> -> #0 (&mm->mmap_sem){++++++}:
> [    3.857393]        [<c00927ec>] __lock_acquire+0x1d70/0x1de0
> [    3.863353]        [<c0092df0>] lock_acquire+0x9c/0x104
> [    3.868855]        [<c00f0b18>] might_fault+0x60/0x90
> [    3.874174]        [<c011bc3c>] filldir+0x5c/0x158
> [    3.879230]        [<c023d1c0>] jffs2_readdir+0xdc/0x1a8
> [    3.884823]        [<c011becc>] vfs_readdir+0x98/0xb4
> [    3.890144]        [<c011bfcc>] sys_getdents+0x74/0xd0
> [    3.895554]        [<c0013820>] ret_fast_syscall+0x0/0x3c
> [    3.901251]
> [    3.901251] other info that might help us debug this:
> [    3.901251]
> [    3.909668]  Possible unsafe locking scenario:
> [    3.909668]
> [    3.915892]        CPU0                    CPU1
> [    3.920652]        ----                    ----
> [    3.925411]   lock(&f->sem);
> [    3.928451]                                lock(&mm->mmap_sem);
> [    3.934688]                                lock(&f->sem);
> [    3.940376]   lock(&mm->mmap_sem);
> [    3.943965]
> [    3.943965]  *** DEADLOCK ***
> [    3.943965]
> [    3.950196] 2 locks held by rcS/686:
> [    3.953952]  #0:  (&type->i_mutex_dir_key){+.+.+.}, at: [<c011be90>] vfs_readdir+0x5c/0xb4
> [    3.962686]  #1:  (&f->sem){+.+.+.}, at: [<c023d128>] jffs2_readdir+0x44/0x1a8
> [    3.970320]
> [    3.970320] stack backtrace:
> [    3.974930] [<c001b158>] (unwind_backtrace+0x0/0xf0) from [<c008f29c>] (print_circular_bug+0x1d0/0x2dc)
> [    3.984815] [<c008f29c>] (print_circular_bug+0x1d0/0x2dc) from [<c00927ec>] (__lock_acquire+0x1d70/0x1de0)
> [    3.994975] [<c00927ec>] (__lock_acquire+0x1d70/0x1de0) from [<c0092df0>] (lock_acquire+0x9c/0x104)
> [    4.004494] [<c0092df0>] (lock_acquire+0x9c/0x104) from [<c00f0b18>] (might_fault+0x60/0x90)
> [    4.013376] [<c00f0b18>] (might_fault+0x60/0x90) from [<c011bc3c>] (filldir+0x5c/0x158)
> [    4.021802] [<c011bc3c>] (filldir+0x5c/0x158) from [<c023d1c0>] (jffs2_readdir+0xdc/0x1a8)
> [    4.030502] [<c023d1c0>] (jffs2_readdir+0xdc/0x1a8) from [<c011becc>] (vfs_readdir+0x98/0xb4)
> [    4.039477] [<c011becc>] (vfs_readdir+0x98/0xb4) from [<c011bfcc>] (sys_getdents+0x74/0xd0)
> [    4.048270] [<c011bfcc>] (sys_getdents+0x74/0xd0) from [<c0013820>] (ret_fast_syscall+0x0/0x3c)

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@...b.auug.org.au

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ