[syzbot] [kernfs?] possible deadlock in mnt_want_write (4)

From: syzbot
Date: Wed Sep 11 2024 - 10:21:46 EST

Next message: Nick Chan: "Re: [PATCH 00/22] Initial device trees for A7-A11 based Apple devices"
Previous message: Baoquan He: "Re: [PATCH RESEND v2] kexec/crash: no crash update when kexec in progress"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Hello,

syzbot found the following issue on:

HEAD commit: b31c44928842 Merge tag 'linux_kselftest-kunit-fixes-6.11-r..
git tree: upstream
console output: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/log.txt?x=1308189f980000
kernel config: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/.config?x=fc7fa3453562e8b
dashboard link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=8dcad7af57014dff2591
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.

Downloadable assets:
disk image: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/f2afb4b42efc/disk-b31c4492.raw.xz
vmlinux: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/756a492884c9/vmlinux-b31c4492.xz
kernel image: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/1506f34ecf8a/bzImage-b31c4492.xz

IMPORTANT: if you fix the issue, please add the following tag to the commit:
Reported-by: syzbot+8dcad7af57014dff2591@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

======================================================
WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
6.11.0-rc6-syzkaller-00308-gb31c44928842 #0 Not tainted
------------------------------------------------------
syz.0.571/10510 is trying to acquire lock:
ffff888065736420 (sb_writers#5){.+.+}-{0:0}, at: mnt_want_write+0x3f/0x90 fs/namespace.c:515

but task is already holding lock:
ffff88805de73b38 (&ovl_i_mutex_dir_key[depth]){++++}-{3:3}, at: inode_lock include/linux/fs.h:800 [inline]
ffff88805de73b38 (&ovl_i_mutex_dir_key[depth]){++++}-{3:3}, at: open_last_lookups fs/namei.c:3644 [inline]
ffff88805de73b38 (&ovl_i_mutex_dir_key[depth]){++++}-{3:3}, at: path_openat+0x7fb/0x3470 fs/namei.c:3883

which lock already depends on the new lock.

the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:

-> #4 (&ovl_i_mutex_dir_key[depth]){++++}-{3:3}:
lock_acquire+0x1ed/0x550 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5759
down_read+0xb1/0xa40 kernel/locking/rwsem.c:1526
inode_lock_shared include/linux/fs.h:810 [inline]
lookup_slow+0x45/0x70 fs/namei.c:1734
walk_component+0x2e1/0x410 fs/namei.c:2039
lookup_last fs/namei.c:2542 [inline]
path_lookupat+0x16f/0x450 fs/namei.c:2566
filename_lookup+0x256/0x610 fs/namei.c:2595
kern_path+0x35/0x50 fs/namei.c:2703
lookup_bdev+0xc5/0x290 block/bdev.c:1157
resume_store+0x1a0/0x710 kernel/power/hibernate.c:1235
kernfs_fop_write_iter+0x3a1/0x500 fs/kernfs/file.c:334
new_sync_write fs/read_write.c:497 [inline]
vfs_write+0xa72/0xc90 fs/read_write.c:590
ksys_write+0x1a0/0x2c0 fs/read_write.c:643
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

-> #3 (&of->mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}:
lock_acquire+0x1ed/0x550 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5759
__mutex_lock_common kernel/locking/mutex.c:608 [inline]
__mutex_lock+0x136/0xd70 kernel/locking/mutex.c:752
kernfs_seq_start+0x53/0x3b0 fs/kernfs/file.c:154
traverse+0x14f/0x550 fs/seq_file.c:106
seq_read_iter+0xc5e/0xd60 fs/seq_file.c:195
copy_splice_read+0x662/0xb60 fs/splice.c:365
do_splice_read fs/splice.c:985 [inline]
splice_file_to_pipe+0x299/0x500 fs/splice.c:1295
do_sendfile+0x515/0xe20 fs/read_write.c:1301
__do_sys_sendfile64 fs/read_write.c:1362 [inline]
__se_sys_sendfile64+0x17c/0x1e0 fs/read_write.c:1348
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

-> #2 (&p->lock){+.+.}-{3:3}:
lock_acquire+0x1ed/0x550 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5759
__mutex_lock_common kernel/locking/mutex.c:608 [inline]
__mutex_lock+0x136/0xd70 kernel/locking/mutex.c:752
seq_read_iter+0xb7/0xd60 fs/seq_file.c:182
copy_splice_read+0x662/0xb60 fs/splice.c:365
do_splice_read fs/splice.c:985 [inline]
splice_file_to_pipe+0x299/0x500 fs/splice.c:1295
do_sendfile+0x515/0xe20 fs/read_write.c:1301
__do_sys_sendfile64 fs/read_write.c:1362 [inline]
__se_sys_sendfile64+0x17c/0x1e0 fs/read_write.c:1348
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

-> #1 (&pipe->mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}:
lock_acquire+0x1ed/0x550 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5759
__mutex_lock_common kernel/locking/mutex.c:608 [inline]
__mutex_lock+0x136/0xd70 kernel/locking/mutex.c:752
iter_file_splice_write+0x335/0x14e0 fs/splice.c:687
do_splice_from fs/splice.c:941 [inline]
do_splice+0xd77/0x1900 fs/splice.c:1354
__do_splice fs/splice.c:1436 [inline]
__do_sys_splice fs/splice.c:1652 [inline]
__se_sys_splice+0x331/0x4a0 fs/splice.c:1634
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

-> #0 (sb_writers#5
){.+.+}-{0:0}:
check_prev_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3133 [inline]
check_prevs_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3252 [inline]
validate_chain+0x18e0/0x5900 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3868
__lock_acquire+0x137a/0x2040 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5142
lock_acquire+0x1ed/0x550 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5759
percpu_down_read include/linux/percpu-rwsem.h:51 [inline]
__sb_start_write include/linux/fs.h:1676 [inline]
sb_start_write+0x4d/0x1c0 include/linux/fs.h:1812
mnt_want_write+0x3f/0x90 fs/namespace.c:515
ovl_create_object+0x13b/0x370 fs/overlayfs/dir.c:642
lookup_open fs/namei.c:3578 [inline]
open_last_lookups fs/namei.c:3647 [inline]
path_openat+0x1a9a/0x3470 fs/namei.c:3883
do_filp_open+0x235/0x490 fs/namei.c:3913
do_sys_openat2+0x13e/0x1d0 fs/open.c:1416
do_sys_open fs/open.c:1431 [inline]
__do_sys_creat fs/open.c:1507 [inline]
__se_sys_creat fs/open.c:1501 [inline]
__x64_sys_creat+0x123/0x170 fs/open.c:1501
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:

Chain exists of:
sb_writers#5 --> &of->mutex --> &ovl_i_mutex_dir_key[depth]

Possible unsafe locking scenario:

CPU0 CPU1
---- ----
lock(&ovl_i_mutex_dir_key[depth]);
lock(&of->mutex);
lock(&ovl_i_mutex_dir_key[depth]);
rlock(sb_writers#5);

*** DEADLOCK ***

2 locks held by syz.0.571/10510:
#0:
ffff888023f38420 (sb_writers#16){.+.+}-{0:0}, at: mnt_want_write+0x3f/0x90 fs/namespace.c:515
#1: ffff88805de73b38 (&ovl_i_mutex_dir_key[depth]){++++}-{3:3}, at: inode_lock include/linux/fs.h:800 [inline]
#1: ffff88805de73b38 (&ovl_i_mutex_dir_key[depth]){++++}-{3:3}, at: open_last_lookups fs/namei.c:3644 [inline]
#1: ffff88805de73b38 (&ovl_i_mutex_dir_key[depth]){++++}-{3:3}, at: path_openat+0x7fb/0x3470 fs/namei.c:3883

stack backtrace:
CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 10510 Comm: syz.0.571 Not tainted 6.11.0-rc6-syzkaller-00308-gb31c44928842 #0
Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 08/06/2024
Call Trace:
<TASK>
__dump_stack lib/dump_stack.c:93 [inline]
dump_stack_lvl+0x241/0x360 lib/dump_stack.c:119
check_noncircular+0x36a/0x4a0 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:2186
check_prev_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3133 [inline]
check_prevs_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3252 [inline]
validate_chain+0x18e0/0x5900 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3868
__lock_acquire+0x137a/0x2040 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5142
lock_acquire+0x1ed/0x550 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5759
percpu_down_read include/linux/percpu-rwsem.h:51 [inline]
__sb_start_write include/linux/fs.h:1676 [inline]
sb_start_write+0x4d/0x1c0 include/linux/fs.h:1812
mnt_want_write+0x3f/0x90 fs/namespace.c:515
ovl_create_object+0x13b/0x370 fs/overlayfs/dir.c:642
lookup_open fs/namei.c:3578 [inline]
open_last_lookups fs/namei.c:3647 [inline]
path_openat+0x1a9a/0x3470 fs/namei.c:3883
do_filp_open+0x235/0x490 fs/namei.c:3913
do_sys_openat2+0x13e/0x1d0 fs/open.c:1416
do_sys_open fs/open.c:1431 [inline]
__do_sys_creat fs/open.c:1507 [inline]
__se_sys_creat fs/open.c:1501 [inline]
__x64_sys_creat+0x123/0x170 fs/open.c:1501
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: 0033:0x7fb30f77cef9
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:00007fb3104d6038 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000055
RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00007fb30f936058 RCX: 00007fb30f77cef9
RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: 0000000000000000 RDI: 0000000020000100
RBP: 00007fb30f7ef046 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000
R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 0000000000000000
R13: 0000000000000000 R14: 00007fb30f936058 R15: 00007fffff90dd88
</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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.

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

Next message: Nick Chan: "Re: [PATCH 00/22] Initial device trees for A7-A11 based Apple devices"
Previous message: Baoquan He: "Re: [PATCH RESEND v2] kexec/crash: no crash update when kexec in progress"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]