linux-kernel - Re: [syzbot] [xfs?] possible deadlock in xfs_buf_find

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6798b351.050a0220.ac840.0249.GAE@google.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2025 02:37:05 -0800
From: syzbot <syzbot+acb56162aef712929d3f@...kaller.appspotmail.com>
To: cem@...nel.org
Cc: cem@...nel.org, chandan.babu@...cle.com, djwong@...nel.org, hch@....de, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org, 
	syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [syzbot] [xfs?] possible deadlock in xfs_buf_find_insert

> On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at 02:29:22AM -0800, syzbot wrote:
>> Hello,
>> 
>> syzbot found the following issue on:
>> 
>> HEAD commit:    aa22f4da2a46 Merge tag 'rproc-v6.14' of git://git.kernel.o..
>> git tree:       upstream
>> console output: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/log.txt?x=100175df980000
>> kernel config:  https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/.config?x=bdecca7d9ba0b0e8
>> dashboard link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=acb56162aef712929d3f
>> compiler:       Debian clang version 15.0.6, GNU ld (GNU Binutils for Debian) 2.40
>> 
>> Unfortunately, I don't have any reproducer for this issue yet.
>
>
> #syz test: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/xfs/xfs-linux.git next-rc

This crash does not have a reproducer. I cannot test it.

>
>> 
>> Downloadable assets:
>> disk image: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/204a46b0b3d6/disk-aa22f4da.raw.xz
>> vmlinux: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/d62db5dd211d/vmlinux-aa22f4da.xz
>> kernel image: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/d9ef2864f84f/bzImage-aa22f4da.xz
>> 
>> IMPORTANT: if you fix the issue, please add the following tag to the commit:
>> Reported-by: syzbot+acb56162aef712929d3f@...kaller.appspotmail.com
>> 
>> ======================================================
>> WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
>> 6.13.0-syzkaller-07632-gaa22f4da2a46 #0 Not tainted
>> ------------------------------------------------------
>> syz.4.192/7178 is trying to acquire lock:
>> ffff888058756e20 (&bp->b_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: spin_lock include/linux/spinlock.h:351 [inline]
>> ffff888058756e20 (&bp->b_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: xfs_buf_try_hold fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c:578 [inline]
>> ffff888058756e20 (&bp->b_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: xfs_buf_find_insert+0x1123/0x1610 fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c:663
>> 
>> but task is already holding lock:
>> ffff88802268b180 (&bch->bc_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: spin_lock include/linux/spinlock.h:351 [inline]
>> ffff88802268b180 (&bch->bc_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: xfs_buf_find_insert+0x3da/0x1610 fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c:655
>> 
>> which lock already depends on the new lock.
>> 
>> 
>> the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
>> 
>> -> #1 (&bch->bc_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}:
>>        lock_acquire+0x1ed/0x550 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5851
>>        __raw_spin_lock include/linux/spinlock_api_smp.h:133 [inline]
>>        _raw_spin_lock+0x2e/0x40 kernel/locking/spinlock.c:154
>>        spin_lock include/linux/spinlock.h:351 [inline]
>>        xfs_buf_rele_cached fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c:1093 [inline]
>>        xfs_buf_rele+0x2bf/0x1660 fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c:1147
>>        process_one_work kernel/workqueue.c:3236 [inline]
>>        process_scheduled_works+0xa66/0x1840 kernel/workqueue.c:3317
>>        worker_thread+0x870/0xd30 kernel/workqueue.c:3398
>>        kthread+0x7a9/0x920 kernel/kthread.c:464
>>        ret_from_fork+0x4b/0x80 arch/x86/kernel/process.c:148
>>        ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30 arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:244
>> 
>> -> #0 (&bp->b_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}:
>>        check_prev_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3163 [inline]
>>        check_prevs_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3282 [inline]
>>        validate_chain+0x18ef/0x5920 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3906
>>        __lock_acquire+0x1397/0x2100 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5228
>>        lock_acquire+0x1ed/0x550 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5851
>>        __raw_spin_lock include/linux/spinlock_api_smp.h:133 [inline]
>>        _raw_spin_lock+0x2e/0x40 kernel/locking/spinlock.c:154
>>        spin_lock include/linux/spinlock.h:351 [inline]
>>        xfs_buf_try_hold fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c:578 [inline]
>>        xfs_buf_find_insert+0x1123/0x1610 fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c:663
>>        xfs_buf_get_map+0x149a/0x1ac0 fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c:754
>>        xfs_buf_read_map+0x110/0xa50 fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c:862
>>        xfs_trans_read_buf_map+0x260/0xab0 fs/xfs/xfs_trans_buf.c:304
>>        xfs_trans_read_buf fs/xfs/xfs_trans.h:212 [inline]
>>        xfs_read_agf+0x2dc/0x630 fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_alloc.c:3378
>>        xfs_alloc_read_agf+0x196/0xbe0 fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_alloc.c:3413
>>        xfs_trim_gather_extents+0x1b2/0x11a0 fs/xfs/xfs_discard.c:203
>>        xfs_trim_perag_extents fs/xfs/xfs_discard.c:374 [inline]
>>        xfs_trim_datadev_extents+0x4c7/0xbb0 fs/xfs/xfs_discard.c:429
>>        xfs_ioc_trim+0x758/0xa90 fs/xfs/xfs_discard.c:887
>>        xfs_file_ioctl+0x84c/0x1c60 fs/xfs/xfs_ioctl.c:1199
>>        vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline]
>>        __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:906 [inline]
>>        __se_sys_ioctl+0xf5/0x170 fs/ioctl.c:892
>>        do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/common.c:52 [inline]
>>        do_syscall_64+0xf3/0x230 arch/x86/entry/common.c:83
>>        entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
>> 
>> other info that might help us debug this:
>> 
>>  Possible unsafe locking scenario:
>> 
>>        CPU0                    CPU1
>>        ----                    ----
>>   lock(&bch->bc_lock);
>>                                lock(&bp->b_lock);
>>                                lock(&bch->bc_lock);
>>   lock(&bp->b_lock);
>> 
>>  *** DEADLOCK ***
>> 
>> 1 lock held by syz.4.192/7178:
>>  #0: ffff88802268b180 (&bch->bc_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: spin_lock include/linux/spinlock.h:351 [inline]
>>  #0: ffff88802268b180 (&bch->bc_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: xfs_buf_find_insert+0x3da/0x1610 fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c:655
>> 
>> stack backtrace:
>> CPU: 1 UID: 0 PID: 7178 Comm: syz.4.192 Not tainted 6.13.0-syzkaller-07632-gaa22f4da2a46 #0
>> Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 12/27/2024
>> Call Trace:
>>  <TASK>
>>  __dump_stack lib/dump_stack.c:94 [inline]
>>  dump_stack_lvl+0x241/0x360 lib/dump_stack.c:120
>>  print_circular_bug+0x13a/0x1b0 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:2076
>>  check_noncircular+0x36a/0x4a0 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:2208
>>  check_prev_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3163 [inline]
>>  check_prevs_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3282 [inline]
>>  validate_chain+0x18ef/0x5920 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3906
>>  __lock_acquire+0x1397/0x2100 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5228
>>  lock_acquire+0x1ed/0x550 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5851
>>  __raw_spin_lock include/linux/spinlock_api_smp.h:133 [inline]
>>  _raw_spin_lock+0x2e/0x40 kernel/locking/spinlock.c:154
>>  spin_lock include/linux/spinlock.h:351 [inline]
>>  xfs_buf_try_hold fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c:578 [inline]
>>  xfs_buf_find_insert+0x1123/0x1610 fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c:663
>>  xfs_buf_get_map+0x149a/0x1ac0 fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c:754
>>  xfs_buf_read_map+0x110/0xa50 fs/xfs/xfs_buf.c:862
>>  xfs_trans_read_buf_map+0x260/0xab0 fs/xfs/xfs_trans_buf.c:304
>>  xfs_trans_read_buf fs/xfs/xfs_trans.h:212 [inline]
>>  xfs_read_agf+0x2dc/0x630 fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_alloc.c:3378
>>  xfs_alloc_read_agf+0x196/0xbe0 fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_alloc.c:3413
>>  xfs_trim_gather_extents+0x1b2/0x11a0 fs/xfs/xfs_discard.c:203
>>  xfs_trim_perag_extents fs/xfs/xfs_discard.c:374 [inline]
>>  xfs_trim_datadev_extents+0x4c7/0xbb0 fs/xfs/xfs_discard.c:429
>>  xfs_ioc_trim+0x758/0xa90 fs/xfs/xfs_discard.c:887
>>  xfs_file_ioctl+0x84c/0x1c60 fs/xfs/xfs_ioctl.c:1199
>>  vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline]
>>  __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:906 [inline]
>>  __se_sys_ioctl+0xf5/0x170 fs/ioctl.c:892
>>  do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/common.c:52 [inline]
>>  do_syscall_64+0xf3/0x230 arch/x86/entry/common.c:83
>>  entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
>> RIP: 0033:0x7f2097f8cd29
>> Code: ff ff c3 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 0f 1f 40 00 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 c7 c1 a8 ff ff ff f7 d8 64 89 01 48
>> RSP: 002b:00007f2098d20038 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000010
>> RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00007f20981a6080 RCX: 00007f2097f8cd29
>> RDX: 00000000200001c0 RSI: 00000000c0185879 RDI: 0000000000000005
>> RBP: 00007f209800e2a0 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000
>> R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 0000000000000000
>> R13: 0000000000000001 R14: 00007f20981a6080 R15: 00007ffefbba5028
>>  </TASK>
>> 
>> 
>> ---
>> This report is generated by a bot. It may contain errors.
>> See https://goo.gl/tpsmEJ for more information about syzbot.
>> syzbot engineers can be reached at syzkaller@...glegroups.com.
>> 
>> syzbot will keep track of this issue. See:
>> https://goo.gl/tpsmEJ#status for how to communicate with syzbot.
>> 
>> If the report is already addressed, let syzbot know by replying with:
>> #syz fix: exact-commit-title
>> 
>> If you want to overwrite report's subsystems, reply with:
>> #syz set subsystems: new-subsystem
>> (See the list of subsystem names on the web dashboard)
>> 
>> If the report is a duplicate of another one, reply with:
>> #syz dup: exact-subject-of-another-report
>> 
>> If you want to undo deduplication, reply with:
>> #syz undup