From: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
To: Gao Xiang <hsiangkao@aol.com>
Cc: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
"Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@oracle.com>,
xfs <linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org>, "tj@kernel.org" <tj@kernel.org>,
"linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-block@vger.kernel.org" <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [5.4-rc1, regression] wb_workfn wakeup oops (was Re: frequent 5.4-rc1 crash?)
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2019 14:01:13 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <41B90CA7-E093-48FA-BDFD-73BE7EB81FB6@fb.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191003084149.GA16347@hsiangkao-HP-ZHAN-66-Pro-G1>
On 3 Oct 2019, at 4:41, Gao Xiang wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Oct 03, 2019 at 04:40:22PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
>> [cc linux-fsdevel, linux-block, tejun ]
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 06:52:47PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>> Does anyone /else/ see this crash in generic/299 on a V4 filesystem
>>> (tho
>>> afaict V5 configs crash too) and a 5.4-rc1 kernel? It seems to pop
>>> up
>>> on generic/299 though only 80% of the time.
>>>
>
> Just a quick glance, I guess there could is a race between (complete
> guess):
>
>
> 160 static void finish_writeback_work(struct bdi_writeback *wb,
> 161 struct wb_writeback_work *work)
> 162 {
> 163 struct wb_completion *done = work->done;
> 164
> 165 if (work->auto_free)
> 166 kfree(work);
> 167 if (done && atomic_dec_and_test(&done->cnt))
>
> ^^^ here
>
> 168 wake_up_all(done->waitq);
> 169 }
>
> since new wake_up_all(done->waitq); is completely on-stack,
> if (done && atomic_dec_and_test(&done->cnt))
> - wake_up_all(&wb->bdi->wb_waitq);
> + wake_up_all(done->waitq);
> }
>
> which could cause use after free if on-stack wb_completion is gone...
> (however previous wb->bdi is solid since it is not on-stack)
>
> see generic on-stack completion which takes a wait_queue spin_lock
> between
> test and wake_up...
>
> If I am wrong, ignore me, hmm...
It's a good guess ;) Jens should have this queued up already:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/9/23/972
-chris
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-03 14:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20191003015247.GI13108@magnolia>
2019-10-03 6:40 ` [5.4-rc1, regression] wb_workfn wakeup oops (was Re: frequent 5.4-rc1 crash?) Dave Chinner
2019-10-03 8:41 ` Gao Xiang
2019-10-03 14:01 ` Chris Mason [this message]
2019-10-03 14:05 ` Jens Axboe
2019-10-03 18:37 ` Darrick J. Wong
2019-10-06 22:30 ` Darrick J. Wong
2019-10-08 3:20 ` Jens Axboe
2019-10-03 14:40 ` Gao Xiang
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=41B90CA7-E093-48FA-BDFD-73BE7EB81FB6@fb.com \
--to=clm@fb.com \
--cc=darrick.wong@oracle.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=hsiangkao@aol.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).