Re: [Syzkaller & bisect] There is "task hung in synchronize_rcu bisect" in v6.3-rc2 kernel

[Pengfei Xu]

On 2023-04-13 at 13:19:08 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 13, 2023 at 10:45:35AM +0800, Pengfei Xu wrote:
> > Hi Huafei and kernel experts,
> > 
> > It's a soft remind.
> > This issue could be reproduced in v6.3-rc6 kernel.
> > It could be reproduced on Alder lake, Raptor lake and so on x86 platforms.
> > After reverted the commit "0e792b89e6800c:ftrace: Fix use-after-free for
> > dynamic ftrace_ops" on top of v6.3-rc6 kernel, this issue was gone.
> > 
> > New syzkaller reproduced code, repro.report, bisect_info.log and detailed logs
> > are in link:
> > https://github.com/xupengfe/syzkaller_logs/tree/main/230412_031722_synchronize_rcu
> 
> I just tested against v6.3-rc6 and again all I get is this io_ring related
> issue:
> 
  Seems this issue could get different behavior on different platforms.
  I could reproduce the synchronize_rcu issue on Alder lake S(cpu model:151)
  and Raptor lake P(cpu model:186) platforms.

  Thanks!
  BR.

> [  448.290752] INFO: task kworker/u4:0:9 blocked for more than 294 seconds.
> [  448.293868]       Not tainted 6.3.0-rc6-kvm #1
> [  448.296019] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
> [  448.299592] task:kworker/u4:0    state:D stack:0     pid:9     ppid:2      flags:0x00004000
> [  448.303397] Workqueue: events_unbound io_ring_exit_work
> [  448.305884] Call Trace:
> [  448.307147]  <TASK>
> [  448.308166]  __schedule+0x422/0xc90
> [  448.309824]  ? wait_for_completion+0x77/0x170
> [  448.311870]  schedule+0x63/0xd0
> [  448.313346]  schedule_timeout+0x2fe/0x4c0
> [  448.315255]  ? __this_cpu_preempt_check+0x1c/0x30
> [  448.317360]  ? _raw_spin_unlock_irq+0x27/0x60
> [  448.319400]  ? lockdep_hardirqs_on+0x88/0x120
> [  448.321395]  ? wait_for_completion+0x77/0x170
> [  448.323462]  wait_for_completion+0x9e/0x170
> [  448.325356]  io_ring_exit_work+0x2b0/0x810
> [  448.327300]  ? __pfx_io_tctx_exit_cb+0x10/0x10
> [  448.329345]  ? _raw_spin_unlock_irq+0x27/0x60
> [  448.331397]  process_one_work+0x34e/0x720
> [  448.333212]  ? __pfx_io_ring_exit_work+0x10/0x10
> [  448.335377]  ? process_one_work+0x34e/0x720
> [  448.337295]  worker_thread+0x4e/0x530
> [  448.339079]  ? __pfx_worker_thread+0x10/0x10
> [  448.341008]  kthread+0x128/0x160
> [  448.342513]  ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10
> [  448.344305]  ret_from_fork+0x2c/0x50
> [  448.346016]  </TASK>
> [  448.347176] 
> [  448.347176] Showing all locks held in the system:
> [  448.349887] 2 locks held by kworker/u4:0/9:
> [  448.351829]  #0: ffff88807eb6dd38 ((wq_completion)events_unbound){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: process_one_work+0x2b4/0x720
> [  448.356362]  #1: ffffc9000005fe68 ((work_completion)(&ctx->exit_work)){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: process_one_work+0x2b4/0x720
> [  448.361052] 1 lock held by rcu_tasks_kthre/11:
> [  448.363142]  #0: ffffffff83963450 (rcu_tasks.tasks_gp_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: rcu_tasks_one_gp+0x31/0x440
> [  448.367396] 1 lock held by rcu_tasks_rude_/12:
> [  448.369387]  #0: ffffffff839631d0 (rcu_tasks_rude.tasks_gp_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: rcu_tasks_one_gp+0x31/0x440
> [  448.373808] 1 lock held by rcu_tasks_trace/13:
> [  448.375852]  #0: ffffffff83962f10 (rcu_tasks_trace.tasks_gp_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: rcu_tasks_one_gp+0x31/0x440
> [  448.380434] 1 lock held by khungtaskd/30:
> [  448.382219]  #0: ffffffff83963e60 (rcu_read_lock){....}-{1:2}, at: debug_show_all_locks+0x17/0x1d0
> [  448.386291] 
> [  448.387159] =============================================
> [  448.387159]