[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAEXW_YTps99nspdCtvMi6hO7kbpz8PgOH--g4d2-8gticrs4OQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2020 23:23:55 -0400
From: Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
To: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>,
Todd Kjos <tkjos@...roid.com>,
Martijn Coenen <maco@...roid.com>,
Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>,
Hridya Valsaraju <hridya@...gle.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>, hdanton@...a.com,
ebiggers@...nel.org,
"open list:ANDROID DRIVERS" <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
kernel-team <kernel-team@...roid.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] staging: android: ashmem: Fix lockdep warning for
write operation
On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 10:45 PM Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> syzbot report [1] describes a deadlock when write operation against an
> ashmem fd executed at the time when ashmem is shrinking its cache results
> in the following lock sequence:
>
> Possible unsafe locking scenario:
>
> CPU0 CPU1
> ---- ----
> lock(fs_reclaim);
> lock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#13);
> lock(fs_reclaim);
> lock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#13);
>
> kswapd takes fs_reclaim and then inode_lock while generic_perform_write
> takes inode_lock and then fs_reclaim. However ashmem does not support
> writing into backing shmem with a write syscall. The only way to change
> its content is to mmap it and operate on mapped memory. Therefore the race
> that lockdep is warning about is not valid. Resolve this by introducing a
> separate lockdep class for the backing shmem inodes.
>
> [1]: https://lkml.kernel.org/lkml/0000000000000b5f9d059aa2037f@google.com/
>
> Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
> ---
Once Eric's nits are resolved:
Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@...lfernandes.org>
Thanks.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists