Re: kvm: deadlock in kvm_vgic_map_resources

[Marc Zyngier]

Hi Dmitry,

On 11/01/17 19:01, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> While running syzkaller fuzzer I've got the following deadlock.
> On commit 9c763584b7c8911106bb77af7e648bef09af9d80.
> 
> 
> =============================================
> [ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ]
> 4.9.0-rc6-xc2-00056-g08372dd4b91d-dirty #50 Not tainted
> ---------------------------------------------
> syz-executor/20805 is trying to acquire lock:
> (
> &kvm->lock
> ){+.+.+.}
> , at:
> [< inline >] kvm_vgic_dist_destroy
> arch/arm64/kvm/../../../virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-init.c:271
> [<ffff2000080ea4bc>] kvm_vgic_destroy+0x34/0x250
> arch/arm64/kvm/../../../virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-init.c:294
> but task is already holding lock:
> (&kvm->lock){+.+.+.}, at:
> [<ffff2000080ea7e4>] kvm_vgic_map_resources+0x2c/0x108
> arch/arm64/kvm/../../../virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-init.c:343
> other info that might help us debug this:
> Possible unsafe locking scenario:
> CPU0
> ----
> lock(&kvm->lock);
> lock(&kvm->lock);
> *** DEADLOCK ***
> May be due to missing lock nesting notation
> 2 locks held by syz-executor/20805:
> #0:(&vcpu->mutex){+.+.+.}, at:
> [<ffff2000080bcc30>] vcpu_load+0x28/0x1d0
> arch/arm64/kvm/../../../virt/kvm/kvm_main.c:143
> #1:(&kvm->lock){+.+.+.}, at:
> [<ffff2000080ea7e4>] kvm_vgic_map_resources+0x2c/0x108
> arch/arm64/kvm/../../../virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-init.c:343
> stack backtrace:
> CPU: 2 PID: 20805 Comm: syz-executor Not tainted
> 4.9.0-rc6-xc2-00056-g08372dd4b91d-dirty #50
> Hardware name: Hardkernel ODROID-C2 (DT)
> Call trace:
> [<ffff200008090560>] dump_backtrace+0x0/0x3c8 arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c:69
> [<ffff200008090948>] show_stack+0x20/0x30 arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c:219
> [< inline >] __dump_stack lib/dump_stack.c:15
> [<ffff200008895840>] dump_stack+0x100/0x150 lib/dump_stack.c:51
> [< inline >] print_deadlock_bug kernel/locking/lockdep.c:1728
> [< inline >] check_deadlock kernel/locking/lockdep.c:1772
> [< inline >] validate_chain kernel/locking/lockdep.c:2250
> [<ffff2000081c8718>] __lock_acquire+0x1938/0x3440 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3335
> [<ffff2000081caa84>] lock_acquire+0xdc/0x1d8 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3746
> [< inline >] __mutex_lock_common kernel/locking/mutex.c:521
> [<ffff200009700004>] mutex_lock_nested+0xdc/0x7b8 kernel/locking/mutex.c:621
> [< inline >] kvm_vgic_dist_destroy
> arch/arm64/kvm/../../../virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-init.c:271
> [<ffff2000080ea4bc>] kvm_vgic_destroy+0x34/0x250
> arch/arm64/kvm/../../../virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-init.c:294
> [<ffff2000080ec290>] vgic_v2_map_resources+0x218/0x430
> arch/arm64/kvm/../../../virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-v2.c:295
> [<ffff2000080ea884>] kvm_vgic_map_resources+0xcc/0x108
> arch/arm64/kvm/../../../virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-init.c:348
> [< inline >] kvm_vcpu_first_run_init
> arch/arm64/kvm/../../../arch/arm/kvm/arm.c:505
> [<ffff2000080d2768>] kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_run+0xab8/0xce0
> arch/arm64/kvm/../../../arch/arm/kvm/arm.c:591
> [<ffff2000080c1fec>] kvm_vcpu_ioctl+0x434/0xc08
> arch/arm64/kvm/../../../virt/kvm/kvm_main.c:2557
> [< inline >] vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:43
> [<ffff200008450c38>] do_vfs_ioctl+0x128/0xfc0 fs/ioctl.c:679
> [< inline >] SYSC_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:694
> [<ffff200008451b78>] SyS_ioctl+0xa8/0xb8 fs/ioctl.c:685
> [<ffff200008083ef0>] el0_svc_naked+0x24/0x28 arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S:755

Nice catch, and many thanks for reporting this.

The bug is fairly obvious. Christoffer, what do you think? I don't think
we need to hold the kvm->lock all the way, but I'd like another pair of
eyes (the coffee machine is out of order again, and tea doesn't cut it).

Thanks,

	M.