linux-kernel - Re: [syzbot] [kernfs?] possible deadlock in kernfs_fop

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2024 17:23:33 +0100
From: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
To: syzbot <syzbot+9a5b0ced8b1bfb238b56@...kaller.appspotmail.com>
Cc: amir73il@...il.com, brauner@...nel.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
	hch@....de, jack@...e.cz, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, miklos@...redi.hu,
	syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com, tj@...nel.org,
	valesini@...dex-team.ru
Subject: Re: [syzbot] [kernfs?] possible deadlock in kernfs_fop_llseek

On Fri, Apr 05, 2024 at 08:37:03AM -0700, syzbot wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> syzbot tried to test the proposed patch but the build/boot failed:

WTF?  The patch is

diff --git a/fs/kernfs/file.c b/fs/kernfs/file.c
index e9df2f87072c6..8502ef68459b9 100644
--- a/fs/kernfs/file.c
+++ b/fs/kernfs/file.c
@@ -636,11 +636,18 @@ static int kernfs_fop_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
 	 * each file a separate locking class.  Let's differentiate on
 	 * whether the file has mmap or not for now.
 	 *
-	 * Both paths of the branch look the same.  They're supposed to
+	 * For similar reasons, writable and readonly files are given different
+	 * lockdep key, because the writable file /sys/power/resume may call vfs
+	 * lookup helpers for arbitrary paths and readonly files can be read by
+	 * overlayfs from vfs helpers when sysfs is a lower layer of overalyfs.
+	 *
+	 * All three cases look the same.  They're supposed to
 	 * look that way and give @of->mutex different static lockdep keys.
 	 */
 	if (has_mmap)
 		mutex_init(&of->mutex);
+	else if (file->f_mode & FMODE_WRITE)
+		mutex_init(&of->mutex);
 	else
 		mutex_init(&of->mutex);
 
How could it possibly trigger boot failure?  Test the parent, perhaps?