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  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:   Mon, 30 Jan 2017 16:48:08 +0100
From:   Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
To:     Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
Cc:     Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
        "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        syzkaller <syzkaller@...glegroups.com>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: mm: deadlock between get_online_cpus/pcpu_alloc

On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 6:22 PM, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz> wrote:
> On 29.1.2017 13:44, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I've got the following deadlock report while running syzkaller fuzzer
>> on f37208bc3c9c2f811460ef264909dfbc7f605a60:
>>
>> [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
>> 4.10.0-rc5-next-20170125 #1 Not tainted
>> -------------------------------------------------------
>> syz-executor3/14255 is trying to acquire lock:
>>  (cpu_hotplug.dep_map){++++++}, at: [<ffffffff814271c7>]
>> get_online_cpus+0x37/0x90 kernel/cpu.c:239
>>
>> but task is already holding lock:
>>  (pcpu_alloc_mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff81937fee>]
>> pcpu_alloc+0xbfe/0x1290 mm/percpu.c:897
>>
>> which lock already depends on the new lock.
>
> I suspect the dependency comes from recent changes in drain_all_pages(). They
> were later redone (for other reasons, but nice to have another validation) in
> the mmots patch [1], which AFAICS is not yet in mmotm and thus linux-next. Could
> you try if it helps?

It happened only once on linux-next, so I can't verify the fix. But I
will watch out for other occurrences.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists