padata: Is padata_find_next() thread-safe?

[Tetsuo Handa]

syzbot is reporting possibility of recursive locking at
https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=bd936ccd4339cea66e6b .
If this is a false positive report, the fix will be as simple as

--- a/kernel/padata.c
+++ b/kernel/padata.c
@@ -253,7 +253,7 @@ static struct padata_priv *padata_find_next(struct parallel_data *pd, int cpu,
 
 	reorder = per_cpu_ptr(pd->reorder_list, cpu);
 
-	spin_lock(&reorder->lock);
+	spin_lock_nested(&reorder->lock, 1);
 	if (list_empty(&reorder->list))
 		goto notfound;

. But I don't know if there is a possibility of AB-BA deadlock.

Can a sequence shown below possible? If it is possible, how is calling
padata_find_next() with a spinlock already held by caller introduced by
commit 71203f68c774 ("padata: Fix pd UAF once and for all") thread-safe?

  struct padata_list list[2];

  CPU 0:                         CPU 1:

  spin_lock(&list[0].lock);
                                 spin_lock(&list[1].lock);
  spin_lock_nested(&list[1].lock, 1);
                                 spin_lock_nested(&list[0].lock, 1);
  do_something();
                                 do_something();
  spin_unlock(&list[1].lock);
                                 spin_unlock(&list[0].lock);
  spin_unlock(&list[0].lock);
                                 spin_unlock(&list[1].lock);