[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20170610.162255.1370591270114423894.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2017 16:22:55 -0400 (EDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: lucien.xin@...il.com
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-sctp@...r.kernel.org,
marcelo.leitner@...il.com, nhorman@...driver.com,
xiyou.wangcong@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] sctp: fix recursive locking warning in
sctp_do_peeloff
From: Xin Long <lucien.xin@...il.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2017 14:56:56 +0800
> Dmitry got the following recursive locking report while running syzkaller
> fuzzer, the Call Trace:
...
> This warning is caused by the lock held by sctp_getsockopt() is on one
> socket, while the other lock that sctp_close() is getting later is on
> the newly created (which failed) socket during peeloff operation.
>
> This patch is to avoid this warning by use lock_sock with subclass
> SINGLE_DEPTH_NESTING as Wang Cong and Marcelo's suggestion.
>
> Reported-by: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
> Suggested-by: Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@...il.com>
> Suggested-by: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
> Signed-off-by: Xin Long <lucien.xin@...il.com>
Applied.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists