| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <04128618-962f-fd4e-64a9-09ecf7f83776@deltatee.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2022 12:41:23 -0600
From: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>
To: Yu Kuai <yukuai1@...weicloud.com>, song@...nel.org
Cc: linux-raid@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
yukuai3@...wei.com, yi.zhang@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next 2/3] md/raid10: convert resync_lock to use seqlock
Hi,
On 2022-08-29 07:15, Yu Kuai wrote:
> From: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@...wei.com>
>
> Currently, wait_barrier() will hold 'resync_lock' to read 'conf->barrier',
> and io can't be dispatched until 'barrier' is dropped.
>
> Since holding the 'barrier' is not common, convert 'resync_lock' to use
> seqlock so that holding lock can be avoided in fast path.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@...wei.com>
I've found some lockdep issues starting with this patch in md-next while
running mdadm tests (specifically 00raid10 when run about 10 times in a
row).
I've seen a couple different lock dep errors. The first seems to be
reproducible on this patch, then it possibly changes to the second on
subsequent patches. Not sure exactly.
I haven't dug into it too deeply, but hopefully it can be fixed easily.
Logan
--
================================
WARNING: inconsistent lock state
6.0.0-rc2-eid-vmlocalyes-dbg-00023-gfd68041d2fd2 #2604 Not tainted
--------------------------------
inconsistent {IN-SOFTIRQ-W} -> {SOFTIRQ-ON-W} usage.
fsck.ext3/1695 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE0:SE1] takes:
ffff8881049b0120 (&____s->seqcount#10){+.?.}-{0:0}, at:
raid10_read_request+0x21f/0x760
(raid10.c:1134)
{IN-SOFTIRQ-W} state was registered at:
lock_acquire+0x183/0x440
lower_barrier+0x5e/0xd0
end_sync_request+0x178/0x180
end_sync_write+0x193/0x380
bio_endio+0x346/0x3a0
blk_update_request+0x1eb/0x7c0
blk_mq_end_request+0x30/0x50
lo_complete_rq+0xb7/0x100
blk_complete_reqs+0x77/0x90
blk_done_softirq+0x38/0x40
__do_softirq+0x10c/0x650
run_ksoftirqd+0x48/0x80
smpboot_thread_fn+0x302/0x400
kthread+0x18c/0x1c0
ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30
irq event stamp: 8930
hardirqs last enabled at (8929): [<ffffffff96df8351>]
_raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x31/0x60
hardirqs last disabled at (8930): [<ffffffff96df7fc5>]
_raw_spin_lock_irq+0x75/0x90
softirqs last enabled at (6768): [<ffffffff9554970e>]
__irq_exit_rcu+0xfe/0x150
softirqs last disabled at (6757): [<ffffffff9554970e>]
__irq_exit_rcu+0xfe/0x150
other info that might help us debug this:
Possible unsafe locking scenario:
CPU0
----
lock(&____s->seqcount#10);
<Interrupt>
lock(&____s->seqcount#10);
*** DEADLOCK ***
2 locks held by fsck.ext3/1695:
#0: ffff8881007d0930 (mapping.invalidate_lock#2){++++}-{3:3}, at:
page_cache_ra_unbounded+0xaf/0x250
#1: ffff8881049b0120 (&____s->seqcount#10){+.?.}-{0:0}, at:
raid10_read_request+0x21f/0x760
stack backtrace:
CPU: 0 PID: 1695 Comm: fsck.ext3 Not tainted
6.0.0-rc2-eid-vmlocalyes-dbg-00023-gfd68041d2fd2 #2604
Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 1.14.0-2
04/01/2014
Call Trace:
<TASK>
dump_stack_lvl+0x5a/0x74
dump_stack+0x10/0x12
print_usage_bug.part.0+0x233/0x246
mark_lock.part.0.cold+0x73/0x14f
mark_held_locks+0x71/0xa0
lockdep_hardirqs_on_prepare+0x158/0x230
trace_hardirqs_on+0x34/0x100
_raw_spin_unlock_irq+0x28/0x60
wait_barrier+0x4a6/0x720
raid10.c:1004
raid10_read_request+0x21f/0x760
raid10_make_request+0x2d6/0x2160
md_handle_request+0x3f3/0x5b0
md_submit_bio+0xd9/0x120
__submit_bio+0x9d/0x100
submit_bio_noacct_nocheck+0x1fd/0x470
submit_bio_noacct+0x4c2/0xbb0
submit_bio+0x3f/0xf0
mpage_readahead+0x323/0x3b0
blkdev_readahead+0x15/0x20
read_pages+0x136/0x7a0
page_cache_ra_unbounded+0x18d/0x250
page_cache_ra_order+0x2c9/0x400
ondemand_readahead+0x320/0x730
page_cache_sync_ra+0xa6/0xb0
filemap_get_pages+0x1eb/0xc00
filemap_read+0x1f1/0x770
blkdev_read_iter+0x164/0x310
vfs_read+0x467/0x5a0
__x64_sys_pread64+0x122/0x160
do_syscall_64+0x35/0x80
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x46/0xb0
--
======================================================
WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
6.0.0-rc2-eid-vmlocalyes-dbg-00027-gcd6aa5181bbb #2600 Not tainted
------------------------------------------------------
systemd-udevd/292 is trying to acquire lock:
ffff88817b644170 (&(&conf->resync_lock)->lock){....}-{2:2}, at:
wait_barrier+0x4fe/0x770
but task is already holding lock:
ffff88817b644120 (&____s->seqcount#11){+.+.}-{0:0}, at:
raid10_read_request+0x21f/0x760
raid10.c:1140 wait_barrier()
raid10.c:1204 regular_request_wait()
which lock already depends on the new lock.
the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
-> #1 (&____s->seqcount#11){+.+.}-{0:0}:
raise_barrier+0xe0/0x300
raid10.c:940 write_seqlock_irq()
raid10_sync_request+0x629/0x4750
raid10.c:3689 raise_barrire()
md_do_sync.cold+0x8ec/0x1491
md_thread+0x19d/0x2d0
kthread+0x18c/0x1c0
ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30
-> #0 (&(&conf->resync_lock)->lock){....}-{2:2}:
__lock_acquire+0x1cb4/0x3170
lock_acquire+0x183/0x440
_raw_spin_lock_irq+0x4d/0x90
wait_barrier+0x4fe/0x770
raid10_read_request+0x21f/0x760
raid10.c:1140 wait_barrier()
raid10.c:1204 regular_request_wait()
raid10_make_request+0x2d6/0x2190
md_handle_request+0x3f3/0x5b0
md_submit_bio+0xd9/0x120
__submit_bio+0x9d/0x100
submit_bio_noacct_nocheck+0x1fd/0x470
submit_bio_noacct+0x4c2/0xbb0
submit_bio+0x3f/0xf0
submit_bh_wbc+0x270/0x2a0
block_read_full_folio+0x37c/0x580
blkdev_read_folio+0x18/0x20
filemap_read_folio+0x3f/0x110
do_read_cache_folio+0x13b/0x2c0
read_cache_folio+0x42/0x50
read_part_sector+0x74/0x1c0
read_lba+0x176/0x2a0
efi_partition+0x1ce/0xdd0
bdev_disk_changed+0x2e7/0x6a0
blkdev_get_whole+0xd2/0x140
blkdev_get_by_dev.part.0+0x37f/0x570
blkdev_get_by_dev+0x51/0x60
disk_scan_partitions+0xad/0xf0
blkdev_common_ioctl+0x3f3/0xdf0
blkdev_ioctl+0x1e1/0x450
__x64_sys_ioctl+0xc0/0x100
do_syscall_64+0x35/0x80
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x46/0xb0
other info that might help us debug this:
Possible unsafe locking scenario:
CPU0 CPU1
---- ----
lock(&____s->seqcount#11);
lock(&(&conf->resync_lock)->lock);
lock(&____s->seqcount#11);
lock(&(&conf->resync_lock)->lock);
*** DEADLOCK ***
2 locks held by systemd-udevd/292:
#0: ffff88817a532528 (&disk->open_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at:
blkdev_get_by_dev.part.0+0x180/0x570
#1: ffff88817b644120 (&____s->seqcount#11){+.+.}-{0:0}, at:
raid10_read_request+0x21f/0x760
stack backtrace:
CPU: 3 PID: 292 Comm: systemd-udevd Not tainted
6.0.0-rc2-eid-vmlocalyes-dbg-00027-gcd6aa5181bbb #2600
Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 1.14.0-2
04/01/2014
Call Trace:
<TASK>
dump_stack_lvl+0x5a/0x74
dump_stack+0x10/0x12
print_circular_bug.cold+0x146/0x14b
check_noncircular+0x1ff/0x250
__lock_acquire+0x1cb4/0x3170
lock_acquire+0x183/0x440
_raw_spin_lock_irq+0x4d/0x90
wait_barrier+0x4fe/0x770
raid10_read_request+0x21f/0x760
raid10_make_request+0x2d6/0x2190
md_handle_request+0x3f3/0x5b0
md_submit_bio+0xd9/0x120
__submit_bio+0x9d/0x100
submit_bio_noacct_nocheck+0x1fd/0x470
submit_bio_noacct+0x4c2/0xbb0
submit_bio+0x3f/0xf0
submit_bh_wbc+0x270/0x2a0
block_read_full_folio+0x37c/0x580
blkdev_read_folio+0x18/0x20
filemap_read_folio+0x3f/0x110
do_read_cache_folio+0x13b/0x2c0
read_cache_folio+0x42/0x50
read_part_sector+0x74/0x1c0
read_lba+0x176/0x2a0
efi_partition+0x1ce/0xdd0
bdev_disk_changed+0x2e7/0x6a0
blkdev_get_whole+0xd2/0x140
blkdev_get_by_dev.part.0+0x37f/0x570
blkdev_get_by_dev+0x51/0x60
disk_scan_partitions+0xad/0xf0
blkdev_common_ioctl+0x3f3/0xdf0
blkdev_ioctl+0x1e1/0x450
__x64_sys_ioctl+0xc0/0x100
do_syscall_64+0x35/0x80
Powered by blists - more mailing lists