| 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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2013 15:28:39 +0800
From: Xiaotian Feng <xtfeng@...il.com>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, neilb@...e.de,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: page fault deadlock
On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 11:25:32AM +0800, Xiaotian Feng wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> When I upgrade to latest kernel, I found my system hang there. It
>> is reproducible on my virtualbox, and I found each time I mounted my
>> RAID6 partition and tried to vi or build kernel, my whole system
>> lockup very soon.
>>
>> After turning on lockdep, I found following lockdep warning:
>>
>> [ 27.848462]
>> [ 27.848471] ======================================================
>> [ 27.848477] [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
>> [ 27.848484] 3.13.0-rc1+ #1 Tainted: GF W
>> [ 27.848490] -------------------------------------------------------
>> [ 27.848496] Xorg/1268 is trying to acquire lock:
>> [ 27.848501] (&of->mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff8125d58f>]
>> sysfs_bin_mmap+0x4f/0x120
>> [ 27.848516]
>> [ 27.848516] but task is already holding lock:
>> [ 27.848521] (&mm->mmap_sem){++++++}, at: [<ffffffff811875bf>]
>> vm_mmap_pgoff+0x6f/0xc0
>> [ 27.848534]
>> [ 27.848534] which lock already depends on the new lock.
>> [ 27.848534]
>> [ 27.848541]
>> [ 27.848541] the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
>> [ 27.848547]
>> [ 27.848547] -> #2 (&mm->mmap_sem){++++++}:
>> [ 27.848556] [<ffffffff810c0510>] lock_acquire+0xb0/0x160
>> [ 27.848564] [<ffffffff8119177c>] might_fault+0x8c/0xb0
>> [ 27.848572] [<ffffffff815f4c08>] md_ioctl+0xa78/0x19b0
>> [ 27.848580] [<ffffffff813915a4>] blkdev_ioctl+0x234/0x840
>> [ 27.848588] [<ffffffff8121db61>] block_ioctl+0x41/0x50
>> [ 27.848597] [<ffffffff811f5330>] do_vfs_ioctl+0x300/0x520
>> [ 27.848605] [<ffffffff811f55d1>] SyS_ioctl+0x81/0xa0
>> [ 27.848613] [<ffffffff81784e98>] tracesys+0xe1/0xe6
>> [ 27.848622]
>> [ 27.848622] -> #1 (&mddev->reconfig_mutex){+.+.+.}:
>> [ 27.848630] [<ffffffff810c0510>] lock_acquire+0xb0/0x160
>> [ 27.848637] [<ffffffff81778568>]
>> mutex_lock_interruptible_nested+0x78/0x610
>> [ 27.848646] [<ffffffff815e9750>] rdev_attr_show+0x40/0x90
>> [ 27.848654] [<ffffffff8125db2a>] sysfs_seq_show+0xda/0x170
>> [ 27.848662] [<ffffffff812076f4>] seq_read+0x164/0x3e0
>> [ 27.848671] [<ffffffff811e1005>] vfs_read+0x95/0x160
>> [ 27.848680] [<ffffffff811e1b19>] SyS_read+0x49/0xa0
>> [ 27.848687] [<ffffffff81784e98>] tracesys+0xe1/0xe6
>> [ 27.848695]
>> [ 27.848695] -> #0 (&of->mutex){+.+.+.}:
>> [ 27.848703] [<ffffffff810bfd47>] __lock_acquire+0x1587/0x1ca0
>> [ 27.848711] [<ffffffff810c0510>] lock_acquire+0xb0/0x160
>> [ 27.848718] [<ffffffff81778048>] mutex_lock_nested+0x68/0x510
>> [ 27.848725] [<ffffffff8125d58f>] sysfs_bin_mmap+0x4f/0x120
>> [ 27.848732] [<ffffffff8119d82d>] mmap_region+0x3ed/0x5d0
>> [ 27.848741] [<ffffffff8119dd5e>] do_mmap_pgoff+0x34e/0x3d0
>> [ 27.848748] [<ffffffff811875e0>] vm_mmap_pgoff+0x90/0xc0
>> [ 27.848755] [<ffffffff8119c2b5>] SyS_mmap_pgoff+0x1d5/0x270
>> [ 27.848763] [<ffffffff8101ae52>] SyS_mmap+0x22/0x30
>> [ 27.848771] [<ffffffff81784e98>] tracesys+0xe1/0xe6
>> [ 27.848778]
>> [ 27.848778] other info that might help us debug this:
>> [ 27.848778]
>> [ 27.848785] Chain exists of:
>> [ 27.848785] &of->mutex --> &mddev->reconfig_mutex --> &mm->mmap_sem
>> [ 27.848785]
>> [ 27.848795] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
>> [ 27.848795]
>> [ 27.848800] CPU0 CPU1
>> [ 27.848805] ---- ----
>> [ 27.848810] lock(&mm->mmap_sem);
>> [ 27.848817] lock(&mddev->reconfig_mutex);
>> [ 27.848824] lock(&mm->mmap_sem);
>> [ 27.848830] lock(&of->mutex);
>> [ 27.848837]
>> [ 27.848837] *** DEADLOCK ***
>> [ 27.848837]
>> [ 27.848844] 1 lock held by Xorg/1268:
>> [ 27.848849] #0: (&mm->mmap_sem){++++++}, at: [<ffffffff811875bf>]
>> vm_mmap_pgoff+0x6f/0xc0
>> [ 27.848861]
>> [ 27.848861] stack backtrace:
>> [ 27.848868] CPU: 1 PID: 1268 Comm: Xorg Tainted: GF W 3.13.0-rc1+ #1
>> [ 27.848873] Hardware name: innotek GmbH VirtualBox/VirtualBox, BIOS
>> VirtualBox 12/01/2006
>> [ 27.848879] ffffffff822daa00 ffff8800d0371bc8 ffffffff817725f7
>> ffffffff822cbdc0
>> [ 27.848901] ffff8800d0371c08 ffffffff8176d9eb ffff8800d0371c60
>> ffff880115b42a78
>> [ 27.848909] 0000000000000000 ffff880115b42a78 ffff880115b422a0
>> 0000000000000001
>> [ 27.848918] Call Trace:
>> [ 27.848930] [<ffffffff817725f7>] dump_stack+0x4e/0x7a
>> [ 27.848942] [<ffffffff8176d9eb>] print_circular_bug+0x1f9/0x208
>> [ 27.848952] [<ffffffff810bfd47>] __lock_acquire+0x1587/0x1ca0
>> [ 27.848964] [<ffffffff8101955f>] ? print_context_stack+0x8f/0x100
>> [ 27.848975] [<ffffffff810c0510>] lock_acquire+0xb0/0x160
>> [ 27.848986] [<ffffffff8125d58f>] ? sysfs_bin_mmap+0x4f/0x120
>> [ 27.848996] [<ffffffff8125d58f>] ? sysfs_bin_mmap+0x4f/0x120
>> [ 27.849007] [<ffffffff81778048>] mutex_lock_nested+0x68/0x510
>> [ 27.849016] [<ffffffff8125d58f>] ? sysfs_bin_mmap+0x4f/0x120
>> [ 27.849027] [<ffffffff8176456e>] ? kmemleak_alloc+0x4e/0xb0
>> [ 27.849038] [<ffffffff8125d58f>] sysfs_bin_mmap+0x4f/0x120
>> [ 27.849048] [<ffffffff8119d82d>] mmap_region+0x3ed/0x5d0
>> [ 27.849058] [<ffffffff8119dd5e>] do_mmap_pgoff+0x34e/0x3d0
>> [ 27.849070] [<ffffffff811875e0>] vm_mmap_pgoff+0x90/0xc0
>> [ 27.849080] [<ffffffff8119c2b5>] SyS_mmap_pgoff+0x1d5/0x270
>> [ 27.849092] [<ffffffff81023c55>] ? syscall_trace_enter+0x145/0x270
>> [ 27.849102] [<ffffffff8101ae52>] SyS_mmap+0x22/0x30
>> [ 27.849112] [<ffffffff81784e98>] tracesys+0xe1/0xe6
>>
>>
>> I think it is a real deadlock, and it is caused by commit
>> 3124eb1679b28726 "sysfs: merge regular and bin file handling".
>>
>> With that commit, sysfs_bin_mmap will hold of->mutex.
>>
>> So assume cpu0 called sysfs_bin_mmap, acquired mmap_sem and trying
>> to get of->mutex.
>>
>> CPU1 called sysfs_seq_show, acqured of->mutex and trying to
>> get mddev->reconfig_mutex.
>>
>> CPU2 called md_ioctl, acquired mddev->reconfig_mutex, and
>> later call copy_from_user and page fault trying to get mmap_sem.
>>
>> DEADLOCK now. I can't test the effort of reverting 3124eb16 as
>> there're a whole patchset and many commits after that. But I do
>> believe it's buggy and the root cause of my system hang.
>>
>> CPU0: CPU1:
>> CPU2:
>> lock(&mm->mmap_sem)
>> lock(&of->mutex);
>>
>> lock(&mddev->reconfig_mutex)
>>
>> lock(&mm->mmap_sem)
>>
>> lock(&mddev->reconfig_mutex)
>> lock(&of->mutex)
>>
>> Can we revert commit 3124eb167? or any patches to solve this page
>> fault deadlock? Thanks.
>
> Can you try linux-next, this should be fixed with a patch in my tree
> there, thanks.
>
Sorry, It's even worse. My whole system lockup when I'm trying to
mount /dev/md0 :(
> greg k-h
--
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