| 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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 31 May 2024 12:22:55 +0200
From: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
To: Linux regressions mailing list <regressions@...ts.linux.dev>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>,
Linux LEDs <linux-leds@...r.kernel.org>,
Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, andrew@...n.ch,
davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org,
pabeni@...hat.com, johanneswueller@...il.com,
"Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Genes Lists <lists@...ience.com>
Subject: Re: Hung tasks due to a AB-BA deadlock between the leds_list_lock
rwsem and the rtnl mutex
Hi,
On 5/31/24 11:50 AM, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 5/31/24 10:39 AM, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote:
>> [adding the LED folks and the regressions list to the list of recipients]
>>
>> Hi, Thorsten here, the Linux kernel's regression tracker. Top-posting
>> for once, to make this easily accessible to everyone.
>>
>> Lee, Pavel, could you look into below regression report please? Thread
>> starts here:
>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/9d189ec329cfe68ed68699f314e191a10d4b5eda.camel@sapience.com/
>>
>> Another report with somewhat similar symptom can be found here:
>> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/e441605c-eaf2-4c2d-872b-d8e541f4cf60@gmail.com/
>>
>> See also Russell's analysis of that report below (many many thx for
>> that, much appreciated Russel!).
>>
>> To my untrained eyes all of this sounds a lot like we still have a 6.9
>> regression related to the LED code somewhere. Reminder, we had earlier
>> trouble, but that was avoided through other measures:
>>
>> * 3d913719df14c2 ("wifi: iwlwifi: Use request_module_nowait") /
>> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/30f757e3-73c5-5473-c1f8-328bab98fd7d@candelatech.com/
>>
>> * c04d1b9ecce565 ("igc: Fix LED-related deadlock on driver unbind") /
>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/ZhRD3cOtz5i-61PB@mail-itl/
>>
>> * 19fa4f2a85d777 ("r8169: fix LED-related deadlock on module removal")
>>
>> That iwlwifi commit even calls it self "work around". The developer that
>> submitted it bisected the problem to a LED merge, but sadly that was the
>> end of it. :-/
>
> I actually have been looking at a ledtrig-netdev lockdep warning yesterday
> which I believe is the same thing. I'll include the lockdep trace below.
>
> According to lockdep there indeed is a ABBA (ish) cyclic deadlock with
> the rtnl mutex vs led-triggers related locks. I believe that this problem
> may be a pre-existing problem but this now actually gets hit in kernels >=
> 6.9 because of commit 66601a29bb23 ("leds: class: If no default trigger is
> given, make hw_control trigger the default trigger"). Before that commit
> the "netdev" trigger would not be bound / set as phy LEDs trigger by default.
>
> +Cc Heiner Kallweit who authored that commit.
>
> The netdev trigger typically is not needed because the PHY LEDs are typically
> under hw-control and the netdev trigger even tries to leave things that way
> so setting it as the active trigger for the LED class device is basically
> a no-op. I guess the goal of that commit is correctly have the triggers
> file content reflect that the LED is controlled by a netdev and to allow
> changing the hw-control mode without the user first needing to set netdev
> as trigger before being able to change the mode.
>
> But there is a price to this, besides the locking problem this also
> causes the ledtrig-netdev module to load on pretty much everyones
> systems (when build as a module) even though 99.999% of our users
> likely does not need this at all...
>
> Given this price and the troubles this is causing I think it might be best
> to revert 66601a29bb23. There might still be a locking issue when setting
> the trigger to netdev manually (I'll check and follow up) but this should
> fix the regression users are hitting since typically users do not set
> the trigger manually.
Ok, I can confirm that the lockdep warning is gone for me with 66601a29bb23
reverted. Unfortunately it does still happen after a "modprobe ledtrig_netdev"
(to add it to the list of available triggers) and then setting the trigger
for /sys/class/leds/enp42s0-0::lan to netdev manually.
Still reverting 66601a29bb23 should avoid the problem getting triggered
and this would seem like a safe fix especially for the 6.9 series and
then the necessary time can be taken to fix the actual underlying locking
issue which 66601a29bb23 exposes.
> Gene, as the original reporter of this can you do "modinfo ledtrig_netdev"
> and if this shows that ledtrig_netdev is a module for you try blacklisting
> ledtrig_netdev ? And if it is not a module can you try building a 6.9
> kernel with commit 66601a29bb23 reverted and see if that helps ?
Regards,
Hans
> Here is the promised lockdep report:
> [ 73.959672] ======================================================
> [ 73.959675] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
> [ 73.959677] 6.10.0-rc1+ #94 Not tainted
> [ 73.959680] ------------------------------------------------------
> [ 73.959682] NetworkManager/1815 is trying to acquire lock:
> [ 73.959685] ffffffffb2145170 (triggers_list_lock){++++}-{3:3}, at: led_trigger_register+0x40/0x1b0
> [ 73.959695]
> but task is already holding lock:
> [ 73.959697] ffffffffb2158fe8 (rtnl_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: rtnetlink_rcv_msg+0x133/0x630
> [ 73.959706]
> which lock already depends on the new lock.
>
> [ 73.959708]
> the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
> [ 73.959710]
> -> #2 (rtnl_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}:
> [ 73.959716] __mutex_lock+0x8c/0xc10
> [ 73.959720] set_device_name+0x2d/0x140 [ledtrig_netdev]
> [ 73.959725] netdev_trig_activate+0x197/0x210 [ledtrig_netdev]
> [ 73.959728] led_trigger_set+0x1e1/0x2e0
> [ 73.959731] led_trigger_register+0x170/0x1b0
> [ 73.959734] do_one_initcall+0x5e/0x3a0
> [ 73.959738] do_init_module+0x60/0x220
> [ 73.959741] __do_sys_init_module+0x15f/0x190
> [ 73.959745] do_syscall_64+0x93/0x180
> [ 73.959748] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e
> [ 73.959752]
> -> #1 (&led_cdev->trigger_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}:
> [ 73.959758] down_write+0x3b/0xd0
> [ 73.959761] led_trigger_set_default+0x34/0xe0
> [ 73.959764] led_classdev_register_ext+0x311/0x3a0
> [ 73.959767] input_leds_connect+0x139/0x260
> [ 73.959770] input_attach_handler.isra.0+0x75/0x90
> [ 73.959773] input_register_device.cold+0xa1/0x150
> [ 73.959776] hidinput_connect+0x848/0xb00
> [ 73.959779] hid_connect+0x567/0x5a0
> [ 73.959783] hid_hw_start+0x3f/0x60
> [ 73.959787] hid_device_probe+0x10d/0x190
> [ 73.959789] really_probe+0xde/0x340
> [ 73.959793] __driver_probe_device+0x78/0x110
> [ 73.959796] driver_probe_device+0x1f/0xa0
> [ 73.959798] __device_attach_driver+0x85/0x110
> [ 73.959801] bus_for_each_drv+0x78/0xc0
> [ 73.959805] __device_attach+0xb0/0x1b0
> [ 73.959808] bus_probe_device+0x94/0xb0
> [ 73.959810] device_add+0x64a/0x860
> [ 73.959814] hid_add_device+0xe5/0x240
> [ 73.959817] usbhid_probe+0x4bb/0x600
> [ 73.959821] usb_probe_interface+0xea/0x2b0
> [ 73.959824] really_probe+0xde/0x340
> [ 73.959827] __driver_probe_device+0x78/0x110
> [ 73.959830] driver_probe_device+0x1f/0xa0
> [ 73.959833] __device_attach_driver+0x85/0x110
> [ 73.959835] bus_for_each_drv+0x78/0xc0
> [ 73.959839] __device_attach+0xb0/0x1b0
> [ 73.959842] bus_probe_device+0x94/0xb0
> [ 73.959844] device_add+0x64a/0x860
> [ 73.959847] usb_set_configuration+0x5e8/0x880
> [ 73.959850] usb_generic_driver_probe+0x3e/0x60
> [ 73.959854] usb_probe_device+0x3d/0x120
> [ 73.959857] really_probe+0xde/0x340
> [ 73.959859] __driver_probe_device+0x78/0x110
> [ 73.959862] driver_probe_device+0x1f/0xa0
> [ 73.959865] __device_attach_driver+0x85/0x110
> [ 73.959868] bus_for_each_drv+0x78/0xc0
> [ 73.959871] __device_attach+0xb0/0x1b0
> [ 73.959874] bus_probe_device+0x94/0xb0
> [ 73.959876] device_add+0x64a/0x860
> [ 73.959880] usb_new_device.cold+0x141/0x38f
> [ 73.959883] hub_event+0x1166/0x1980
> [ 73.959886] process_one_work+0x21a/0x590
> [ 73.959889] worker_thread+0x1d1/0x3e0
> [ 73.959891] kthread+0xee/0x120
> [ 73.959895] ret_from_fork+0x30/0x50
> [ 73.959898] ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30
> [ 73.959902]
> -> #0 (triggers_list_lock){++++}-{3:3}:
> [ 73.959908] __lock_acquire+0x11c6/0x1f20
> [ 73.959911] lock_acquire+0xc8/0x2b0
> [ 73.959914] down_write+0x3b/0xd0
> [ 73.959916] led_trigger_register+0x40/0x1b0
> [ 73.959919] phy_led_triggers_register+0xb4/0x240
> [ 73.959923] phy_attach_direct+0x378/0x380
> [ 73.959926] phy_connect_direct+0x21/0x70
> [ 73.959929] rtl_open+0x2e1/0x490 [r8169]
> [ 73.959934] __dev_open+0xea/0x1b0
> [ 73.959937] __dev_change_flags+0x201/0x240
> [ 73.959939] dev_change_flags+0x22/0x60
> [ 73.959942] do_setlink+0x32d/0x1070
> [ 73.959945] __rtnl_newlink+0x516/0x9d0
> [ 73.959948] rtnl_newlink+0x43/0x70
> [ 73.959951] rtnetlink_rcv_msg+0x159/0x630
> [ 73.959953] netlink_rcv_skb+0x4f/0x100
> [ 73.959956] netlink_unicast+0x18c/0x260
> [ 73.959959] netlink_sendmsg+0x207/0x420
> [ 73.959962] ____sys_sendmsg+0x364/0x3a0
> [ 73.959965] ___sys_sendmsg+0x84/0xd0
> [ 73.959967] __sys_sendmsg+0x8e/0xd0
> [ 73.959971] do_syscall_64+0x93/0x180
> [ 73.959974] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e
> [ 73.959977]
> other info that might help us debug this:
>
> [ 73.959979] Chain exists of:
> triggers_list_lock --> &led_cdev->trigger_lock --> rtnl_mutex
>
> [ 73.959987] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
>
> [ 73.959989] CPU0 CPU1
> [ 73.959991] ---- ----
> [ 73.959993] lock(rtnl_mutex);
> [ 73.959996] lock(&led_cdev->trigger_lock);
> [ 73.960000] lock(rtnl_mutex);
> [ 73.960004] lock(triggers_list_lock);
> [ 73.960007]
> *** DEADLOCK ***
>
> [ 73.960009] 1 lock held by NetworkManager/1815:
> [ 73.960012] #0: ffffffffb2158fe8 (rtnl_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: rtnetlink_rcv_msg+0x133/0x630
> [ 73.960020]
> stack backtrace:
> [ 73.960023] CPU: 5 PID: 1815 Comm: NetworkManager Not tainted 6.10.0-rc1+ #94
> [ 73.960026] Hardware name: Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7C95/B550M PRO-VDH WIFI (MS-7C95), BIOS 2.J0 01/02/2024
> [ 73.960029] Call Trace:
> [ 73.960031] <TASK>
> [ 73.960034] dump_stack_lvl+0x68/0x90
> [ 73.960039] check_noncircular+0x10d/0x120
> [ 73.960044] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5
> [ 73.960048] ? __lock_acquire+0xc19/0x1f20
> [ 73.960055] __lock_acquire+0x11c6/0x1f20
> [ 73.960062] lock_acquire+0xc8/0x2b0
> [ 73.960065] ? led_trigger_register+0x40/0x1b0
> [ 73.960073] down_write+0x3b/0xd0
> [ 73.960076] ? led_trigger_register+0x40/0x1b0
> [ 73.960079] led_trigger_register+0x40/0x1b0
> [ 73.960083] phy_led_triggers_register+0xb4/0x240
> [ 73.960089] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5
> [ 73.960091] ? schedule_timeout+0xc1/0x1b0
> [ 73.960095] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5
> [ 73.960097] ? find_held_lock+0x2b/0x80
> [ 73.960101] ? phy_attach_direct+0x1b0/0x380
> [ 73.960105] ? phy_attach_direct+0x1b0/0x380
> [ 73.960108] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5
> [ 73.960110] ? lock_release+0x169/0x2b0
> [ 73.960115] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5
> [ 73.960118] ? __mutex_unlock_slowpath+0x2d/0x260
> [ 73.960124] phy_attach_direct+0x378/0x380
> [ 73.960128] ? __pfx_r8169_phylink_handler+0x10/0x10 [r8169]
> [ 73.960134] phy_connect_direct+0x21/0x70
> [ 73.960139] rtl_open+0x2e1/0x490 [r8169]
> [ 73.960147] __dev_open+0xea/0x1b0
> [ 73.960152] __dev_change_flags+0x201/0x240
> [ 73.960155] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5
> [ 73.960160] dev_change_flags+0x22/0x60
> [ 73.960165] do_setlink+0x32d/0x1070
> [ 73.960172] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5
> [ 73.960175] ? __lock_acquire+0x3ce/0x1f20
> [ 73.960178] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5
> [ 73.960180] ? __nla_validate_parse+0x52/0xc70
> [ 73.960185] ? __entry_text_end+0x1025c9/0x1025cd
> [ 73.960190] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5
> [ 73.960193] ? __lock_acquire+0x3ce/0x1f20
> [ 73.960199] __rtnl_newlink+0x516/0x9d0
> [ 73.960204] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5
> [ 73.960211] ? __entry_text_end+0x1025c9/0x1025cd
> [ 73.960214] ? rcu_is_watching+0xd/0x40
> [ 73.960217] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5
> [ 73.960220] ? kmalloc_trace_noprof+0x25c/0x320
> [ 73.960224] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5
> [ 73.960230] rtnl_newlink+0x43/0x70
> [ 73.960235] rtnetlink_rcv_msg+0x159/0x630
> [ 73.960241] ? __pfx_rtnetlink_rcv_msg+0x10/0x10
> [ 73.960246] netlink_rcv_skb+0x4f/0x100
> [ 73.960257] netlink_unicast+0x18c/0x260
> [ 73.960262] netlink_sendmsg+0x207/0x420
> [ 73.960270] ____sys_sendmsg+0x364/0x3a0
> [ 73.960273] ? import_iovec+0x17/0x20
> [ 73.960277] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5
> [ 73.960280] ? copy_msghdr_from_user+0xd9/0x150
> [ 73.960286] ___sys_sendmsg+0x84/0xd0
> [ 73.960292] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5
> [ 73.960294] ? __lock_acquire+0x3ce/0x1f20
> [ 73.960299] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5
> [ 73.960304] ? find_held_lock+0x2b/0x80
> [ 73.960307] ? __fget_files+0xc3/0x190
> [ 73.960312] ? __fget_files+0xc3/0x190
> [ 73.960315] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5
> [ 73.960317] ? lock_release+0x169/0x2b0
> [ 73.960322] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5
> [ 73.960327] __sys_sendmsg+0x8e/0xd0
> [ 73.960337] do_syscall_64+0x93/0x180
> [ 73.960340] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5
> [ 73.960345] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5
> [ 73.960349] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5
> [ 73.960352] ? find_held_lock+0x2b/0x80
> [ 73.960356] ? __memcg_slab_free_hook+0x56/0x230
> [ 73.960360] ? __memcg_slab_free_hook+0x56/0x230
> [ 73.960363] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5
> [ 73.960366] ? lock_release+0x169/0x2b0
> [ 73.960370] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5
> [ 73.960373] ? __memcg_slab_free_hook+0x60/0x230
> [ 73.960378] ? kmem_cache_free+0x144/0x430
> [ 73.960382] ? syscall_exit_to_user_mode+0x11/0x280
> [ 73.960387] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5
> [ 73.960390] ? do_syscall_64+0x9f/0x180
> [ 73.960393] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5
> [ 73.960396] ? lockdep_hardirqs_on+0x78/0x100
> [ 73.960400] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5
> [ 73.960403] ? do_syscall_64+0x9f/0x180
> [ 73.960406] ? fd_install+0xba/0x310
> [ 73.960411] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5
> [ 73.960414] ? kmem_cache_free+0x144/0x430
> [ 73.960420] ? do_sys_openat2+0x64/0xb0
> [ 73.960423] ? syscall_exit_to_user_mode+0x11/0x280
> [ 73.960428] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5
> [ 73.960431] ? do_syscall_64+0x9f/0x180
> [ 73.960435] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5
> [ 73.960437] ? lockdep_hardirqs_on+0x78/0x100
> [ 73.960441] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5
> [ 73.960444] ? do_syscall_64+0x9f/0x180
> [ 73.960448] ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5
> [ 73.960453] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e
> [ 73.960457] RIP: 0033:0x7f857a9db79b
> [ 73.960461] Code: 48 89 e5 48 83 ec 20 89 55 ec 48 89 75 f0 89 7d f8 e8 49 7a f7 ff 8b 55 ec 48 8b 75 f0 41 89 c0 8b 7d f8 b8 2e 00 00 00 0f 05 <48> 3d 00 f0 ff ff 77 2d 44 89 c7 48 89 45 f8 e8 a1 7a f7 ff 48 8b
> [ 73.960464] RSP: 002b:00007ffcf5d3a660 EFLAGS: 00000293 ORIG_RAX: 000000000000002e
> [ 73.960468] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 0000000000000001 RCX: 00007f857a9db79b
> [ 73.960471] RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: 00007ffcf5d3a6a0 RDI: 000000000000000d
> [ 73.960473] RBP: 00007ffcf5d3a680 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000
> [ 73.960476] R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000293 R12: 00005632de03d9d0
> [ 73.960478] R13: 000000000000000a R14: 00007ffcf5d3a83c R15: 0000000000000000
> [ 73.960488] </TASK>
> [ 73.960561] Generic FE-GE Realtek PHY r8169-0-2a00:00: attached PHY driver (mii_bus:phy_addr=r8169-0-2a00:00, irq=MAC)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>> On 30.05.24 16:04, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
>>> On Thu, May 30, 2024 at 09:36:45AM -0400, Genes Lists wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 2024-05-30 at 08:53 -0400, Genes Lists wrote:
>>>> This report for 6.9.1 could well be the same issue:
>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/e441605c-eaf2-4c2d-872b-d8e541f4cf60@gmail.com/
>>>
>>> The reg_check_chans_work() thing in pid 285 is likely stuck on the
>>> rtnl lock. The same is true of pid 287.
>>>
>>> That will be because of the thread (pid 663) that's stuck in
>>> __dev_open()...led_trigger_register(), where the rtnl lock will have
>>> been taken in that path. It looks to me like led_trigger_register()
>>> is stuck waiting for read access with the leds_list_lock rwsem.
>>>
>>> There are only two places that take that rwsem in write mode, which
>>> are led_classdev_register_ext() and led_classdev_unregister(). None
>>> of these paths are blocking in v6.9.
>>>
>>> Pid 641 doesn't look significant (its probably waiting for either
>>> pid 285 or 287 to complete its work.)
>>>
>>> Pid 666 looks like it is blocked waiting for exclusive write-access
>>> on the leds_list_lock - but it isn't holding that lock. This means
>>> there must already be some other reader or writer holding this lock.
>>>
>>> Pid 722 doesn't look sigificant (same as pid 641).
>>>
>>> Pid 760 is also waiting for the rtnl lock.
>>>
>>> Pid 854, 855 also doesn't look sigificant (as pid 641).
>>>
>>> And then we get to pid 858. This is in set_device_name(), which
>>> was called from led_trigger_set() and led_trigger_register().
>>> We know from pid 663 that led_trigger_register() can take a read
>>> on leds_list_lock, and indeed it does and then calls
>>> led_match_default_trigger(), which then goes on to call
>>> led_trigger_set(). Bingo, this is why pid 666 is blocked, which
>>> then blocks pid 663. pid 663 takes the rtnl lock, which blocks
>>> everything else _and_ also blocks pid 858 in set_device_name().
>>>
>>> Lockdep would've found this... this is a classic AB-BA deadlock
>>> between the leds_list_lock rwsem and the rtnl mutex.
>>>
>>> I haven't checked to see how that deadlock got introduced, that's
>>> for someone else to do.
>>
>> P.S.:
>>
>> #regzbot report: /
>> #regzbot introduced: f5c31bcf604d
>> #regzbot duplicate:
>> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/e441605c-eaf2-4c2d-872b-d8e541f4cf60@gmail.com/
>> #regzbot summary: leds: Hung tasks due to a AB-BA deadlock between the
>> leds_list_lock rwsem and the rtnl mutex
>>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists