[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1944.1363525619@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2013 13:06:59 +0000
From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>, jack@...e.cz
Cc: dhowells@...hat.com, viro@...IV.linux.org.uk,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, hch@...radead.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, apw@...onical.com, nbd@...nwrt.org,
neilb@...e.de, jordipujolp@...il.com, ezk@....cs.sunysb.edu,
sedat.dilek@...glemail.com, hooanon05@...oo.co.jp, mszeredi@...e.cz
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/9] vfs: export do_splice_direct() to modules
Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu> wrote:
> Export do_splice_direct() to modules. Needed by overlay filesystem.
Apparently you cannot call this from any function that is holding an i_mutex
if the target of the splice uses generic_file_splice_write().
The problem is a potential deadlock situation:
We have places already that do:
mnt_want_write()
mutex_lock()
This can be found in do_last() for example.
However, mnt_want_write() calls sb_start_write() as does
generic_file_splice_write(). So now in ovl_copy_up_locked() you're adding:
mutex_lock()
sb_start_write()
which lockdep reports as a potential ABBA deadlock.
Now, looking at __sb_start_write(), I'm not entirely sure how the deadlock
might operate, so it's possible that this is a false alarm. Maybe Jan Kara can
illuminate further, so I've added him to the cc list.
I've attached the report I got with unionmount.
David
---
[ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ]
3.9.0-rc1-fsdevel+ #934 Not tainted
---------------------------------------------
fs-op/4476 is trying to acquire lock:
(sb_writers#4){.+.+.+}, at: [<ffffffff811087a4>] generic_file_splice_write+0x5d/0x14b
but task is already holding lock:
(sb_writers#4){.+.+.+}, at: [<ffffffff810ff97c>] mnt_want_write+0x1f/0x46
other info that might help us debug this:
Possible unsafe locking scenario:
CPU0
----
lock(sb_writers#4);
lock(sb_writers#4);
*** DEADLOCK ***
May be due to missing lock nesting notation
2 locks held by fs-op/4476:
#0: (sb_writers#4){.+.+.+}, at: [<ffffffff810ff97c>] mnt_want_write+0x1f/0x46
#1: (&type->i_mutex_dir_key[1]){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff81131c74>] __union_copy_up+0x9a/0x132
stack backtrace:
Pid: 4476, comm: fs-op Not tainted 3.9.0-rc1-fsdevel+ #934
Call Trace:
[<ffffffff81070398>] __lock_acquire+0x86a/0x16cf
[<ffffffff811081cc>] ? page_cache_pipe_buf_release+0x1b/0x1b
[<ffffffff810715e2>] lock_acquire+0x57/0x6d
[<ffffffff811087a4>] ? generic_file_splice_write+0x5d/0x14b
[<ffffffff810e3314>] __sb_start_write+0x10d/0x15d
[<ffffffff811087a4>] ? generic_file_splice_write+0x5d/0x14b
[<ffffffff811087a4>] generic_file_splice_write+0x5d/0x14b
[<ffffffff811083d5>] do_splice_from+0x74/0x91
[<ffffffff81108410>] direct_splice_actor+0x1e/0x20
[<ffffffff8110868b>] splice_direct_to_actor+0xc2/0x17e
[<ffffffff811083f2>] ? do_splice_from+0x91/0x91
[<ffffffff8110999d>] do_splice_direct+0x47/0x5a
[<ffffffff81131a99>] __union_copy_up_locked+0x171/0x2b2
[<ffffffff81131cc4>] __union_copy_up+0xea/0x132
[<ffffffff810e02ca>] vfs_truncate+0x15e/0x289
[<ffffffff810e043b>] do_sys_truncate+0x46/0x83
[<ffffffff810e05cf>] sys_truncate+0x9/0xb
[<ffffffff81456f92>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists