| 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: <a67e24eb-b68f-2abc-50af-ae4c2d4cdd95@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2023 07:17:20 +0900
From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>
To: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
USB list <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
Hillf Danton <hdanton@...a.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: Converting dev->mutex into dev->spinlock ?
On 2023/02/08 2:46, Alan Stern wrote:
> The real question is what will happen in your syzbot test scenarios.
> Lockdep certainly ought to be able to detect a real deadlock when one
> occurs. It will be more interesting to find out if it can warn about
> potential deadlocks _without_ them occurring.
For example, https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/repro.c?x=15556074480000 generates
below warning, but I don't have syzbot environment. Please propose an updated
patch (which won't hit WARN_ON_ONCE()) for allowing people to try it in syzbot
environment.
----------
[ 122.946483][ T3692]
[ 122.979855][ T3692] ======================================================
[ 122.984206][ T3692] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
[ 122.986920][ T3692] 6.2.0-rc7-00011-g05ecb680708a-dirty #943 Tainted: G W
[ 122.989918][ T3692] ------------------------------------------------------
[ 122.993357][ T3692] a.out/3692 is trying to acquire lock:
[ 122.995732][ T3692] ffff888128168900 (&dev->mutex_key#165){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: nfc_dev_down+0x26/0x120
[ 123.008266][ T3692]
[ 123.008266][ T3692] but task is already holding lock:
[ 123.010995][ T3692] ffffffff85a09040 (rfkill_global_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: rfkill_fop_write+0x10e/0x360
[ 123.020389][ T3692]
[ 123.020389][ T3692] which lock already depends on the new lock.
[ 123.020389][ T3692]
[ 123.029714][ T3692]
[ 123.029714][ T3692] the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
[ 123.033255][ T3692]
[ 123.033255][ T3692] -> #1 (rfkill_global_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}:
[ 123.037794][ T3692] __mutex_lock_common+0xe6/0xea0
[ 123.040845][ T3692] mutex_lock_nested+0x1b/0x20
[ 123.043990][ T3692] rfkill_register+0x25/0x3d0
[ 123.046100][ T3692] nfc_register_device+0xd9/0x200
[ 123.048369][ T3692] nfcsim_device_new+0x146/0x2c0
[ 123.077246][ T3692] nfcsim_init+0x71/0x130
[ 123.079456][ T3692] do_one_initcall+0xab/0x200
[ 123.081584][ T3692] do_initcall_level+0xd7/0x1c0
[ 123.084613][ T3692] do_initcalls+0x3f/0x80
[ 123.087020][ T3692] kernel_init_freeable+0x230/0x2e0
[ 123.089388][ T3692] kernel_init+0x1b/0x290
[ 123.091567][ T3692] ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30
[ 123.094393][ T3692]
[ 123.094393][ T3692] -> #0 (&dev->mutex_key#165){+.+.}-{3:3}:
[ 123.097522][ T3692] __lock_acquire+0x170d/0x33c0
[ 123.100739][ T3692] lock_acquire+0xd3/0x200
[ 123.103840][ T3692] __mutex_lock_common+0xe6/0xea0
[ 123.106366][ T3692] mutex_lock_nested+0x1b/0x20
[ 123.108942][ T3692] nfc_dev_down+0x26/0x120
[ 123.111542][ T3692] nfc_rfkill_set_block+0x26/0x80
[ 123.114113][ T3692] rfkill_set_block+0xa1/0x1e0
[ 123.116739][ T3692] rfkill_fop_write+0x2e9/0x360
[ 123.148674][ T3692] vfs_write+0x187/0x4d0
[ 123.151862][ T3692] ksys_write+0xc6/0x170
[ 123.156763][ T3692] do_syscall_64+0x41/0x90
[ 123.161519][ T3692] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x46/0xb0
[ 123.171373][ T3692]
[ 123.171373][ T3692] other info that might help us debug this:
[ 123.171373][ T3692]
[ 123.179398][ T3692] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
[ 123.179398][ T3692]
[ 123.183031][ T3692] CPU0 CPU1
[ 123.188115][ T3692] ---- ----
[ 123.190123][ T3692] lock(rfkill_global_mutex);
[ 123.192104][ T3692] lock(&dev->mutex_key#165);
[ 123.200840][ T3692] lock(rfkill_global_mutex);
[ 123.207386][ T3692] lock(&dev->mutex_key#165);
[ 123.241397][ T3692]
[ 123.241397][ T3692] *** DEADLOCK ***
[ 123.241397][ T3692]
[ 123.245893][ T3692] 1 lock held by a.out/3692:
[ 123.250422][ T3692] #0: ffffffff85a09040 (rfkill_global_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: rfkill_fop_write+0x10e/0x360
[ 123.256266][ T3692]
[ 123.256266][ T3692] stack backtrace:
[ 123.258802][ T3692] CPU: 0 PID: 3692 Comm: a.out Tainted: G W 6.2.0-rc7-00011-g05ecb680708a-dirty #943
[ 123.276931][ T3692] Hardware name: innotek GmbH VirtualBox/VirtualBox, BIOS VirtualBox 12/01/2006
[ 123.280352][ T3692] Call Trace:
[ 123.310882][ T3692] <TASK>
[ 123.312232][ T3692] dump_stack_lvl+0xfe/0x190
[ 123.314278][ T3692] check_noncircular+0x12e/0x140
[ 123.317038][ T3692] __lock_acquire+0x170d/0x33c0
[ 123.320079][ T3692] ? __lock_acquire+0x65f/0x33c0
[ 123.321887][ T3692] ? __lock_acquire+0x65f/0x33c0
[ 123.325643][ T3692] lock_acquire+0xd3/0x200
[ 123.327611][ T3692] ? nfc_dev_down+0x26/0x120
[ 123.331732][ T3692] ? nfc_dev_down+0x26/0x120
[ 123.335510][ T3692] ? nfc_dev_down+0x26/0x120
[ 123.337961][ T3692] __mutex_lock_common+0xe6/0xea0
[ 123.340214][ T3692] ? nfc_dev_down+0x26/0x120
[ 123.347330][ T3692] ? nfc_dev_down+0x26/0x120
[ 123.352194][ T3692] mutex_lock_nested+0x1b/0x20
[ 123.356877][ T3692] nfc_dev_down+0x26/0x120
[ 123.361856][ T3692] nfc_rfkill_set_block+0x26/0x80
[ 123.378236][ T3692] rfkill_set_block+0xa1/0x1e0
[ 123.379954][ T3692] rfkill_fop_write+0x2e9/0x360
[ 123.381693][ T3692] ? rfkill_fop_read+0x2a0/0x2a0
[ 123.406421][ T3692] vfs_write+0x187/0x4d0
[ 123.408119][ T3692] ? do_user_addr_fault+0x6e1/0x9c0
[ 123.410174][ T3692] ksys_write+0xc6/0x170
[ 123.411856][ T3692] do_syscall_64+0x41/0x90
[ 123.426593][ T3692] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x46/0xb0
[ 123.429725][ T3692] RIP: 0033:0x7fbea991ea3d
[ 123.431577][ T3692] Code: 5b 41 5c c3 66 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 f3 0f 1e fa 48 89 f8 48 89 f7 48 89 d6 48 89 ca 4d 89 c2 4d 89 c8 4c 8b 4c 24 08 0f 05 <48> 3d 01 f0 ff ff 73 01 c3 48 8b 0d c3 a3 0f 00 f7 d8 64 89 01 48
[ 123.461942][ T3692] RSP: 002b:00007ffc8e2f63a8 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000001
[ 123.468363][ T3692] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00000000000f4240 RCX: 00007fbea991ea3d
[ 123.480268][ T3692] RDX: 0000000000000008 RSI: 0000000020000080 RDI: 0000000000000004
[ 123.487754][ T3692] RBP: 0000000000000000 R08: 0000000000000060 R09: 0000000000000060
[ 123.491003][ T3692] R10: 0000000000000060 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 00007ffc8e2f6538
[ 123.550555][ T3692] R13: 000055cea974c2e0 R14: 00007ffc8e2f63d0 R15: 00007ffc8e2f63c0
[ 123.555519][ T3692] </TASK>
----------
Powered by blists - more mailing lists