[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <69818a6c-7025-8950-da4b-7fdc065d90d6@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2020 22:32:44 -0400
From: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
To: syzbot <syzbot+a9fb1457d720a55d6dc5@...kaller.appspotmail.com>,
adobriyan@...il.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
allison@...utok.net, areber@...hat.com, aubrey.li@...ux.intel.com,
avagin@...il.com, bfields@...ldses.org, christian@...uner.io,
cyphar@...har.com, ebiederm@...ssion.com,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, guro@...com, jlayton@...nel.org,
joel@...lfernandes.org, keescook@...omium.org,
linmiaohe@...wei.com, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mhocko@...e.com, mingo@...nel.org,
oleg@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org, sargun@...gun.me,
syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
viro@...iv.linux.org.uk
Subject: Re: possible deadlock in send_sigio
On 4/4/20 1:55 AM, syzbot wrote:
> Hello,
>
> syzbot found the following crash on:
>
> HEAD commit: bef7b2a7 Merge tag 'devicetree-for-5.7' of git://git.kerne..
> git tree: upstream
> console output: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/log.txt?x=15f39c5de00000
> kernel config: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/.config?x=91b674b8f0368e69
> dashboard link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=a9fb1457d720a55d6dc5
> compiler: gcc (GCC) 9.0.0 20181231 (experimental)
> syz repro: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/repro.syz?x=1454c3b7e00000
> C reproducer: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/repro.c?x=12a22ac7e00000
>
> The bug was bisected to:
>
> commit 7bc3e6e55acf065500a24621f3b313e7e5998acf
> Author: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
> Date: Thu Feb 20 00:22:26 2020 +0000
>
> proc: Use a list of inodes to flush from proc
>
> bisection log: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/bisect.txt?x=165c4acde00000
> final crash: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/report.txt?x=155c4acde00000
> console output: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/log.txt?x=115c4acde00000
>
> IMPORTANT: if you fix the bug, please add the following tag to the commit:
> Reported-by: syzbot+a9fb1457d720a55d6dc5@...kaller.appspotmail.com
> Fixes: 7bc3e6e55acf ("proc: Use a list of inodes to flush from proc")
>
> ========================================================
> WARNING: possible irq lock inversion dependency detected
> 5.6.0-syzkaller #0 Not tainted
> --------------------------------------------------------
> ksoftirqd/0/9 just changed the state of lock:
> ffffffff898090d8 (tasklist_lock){.+.?}-{2:2}, at: send_sigio+0xa9/0x340 fs/fcntl.c:800
> but this lock took another, SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock in the past:
> (&pid->wait_pidfd){+.+.}-{2:2}
>
>
> and interrupts could create inverse lock ordering between them.
>
>
> other info that might help us debug this:
> Possible interrupt unsafe locking scenario:
>
> CPU0 CPU1
> ---- ----
> lock(&pid->wait_pidfd);
> local_irq_disable();
> lock(tasklist_lock);
> lock(&pid->wait_pidfd);
> <Interrupt>
> lock(tasklist_lock);
>
> *** DEADLOCK ***
That is a false positive. The qrwlock has the special property that it
becomes unfair (for read lock) at interrupt context. So unless it is
taking a write lock in the interrupt context, it won't go into deadlock.
The current lockdep code does not capture the full semantics of qrwlock
leading to this false positive.
Cheers,
Longman
Powered by blists - more mailing lists