From: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
To: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>,
overlayfs <linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][RESEND] kernel/acct.c: fix locking order when switching acct files
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2019 16:22:34 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAOQ4uxiZJfdRfyKwD1q8RbrT1KTRdLoErpWg0tFnD1fsxg9+Wg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOQ4uxiNNRBT+EfRu05n2egFt4v_MpnfEkKo1LSHWnxs4BxpaA@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 10:39 PM Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 8:51 AM Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > This looks like an old bug, pre-dating the "Fixes" commit, but the
> > "Fixes" commit did not handle it properly.
> >
> > The bug recently surfaced as a lockdep possible deadlock warning
> > with commit d1d04ef8572b ("ovl: stack file ops").
> >
> > When acct_on() replaces one acct file with another, it takes sb_writers
> > lock on new file sb and calls acct_pin_kill(old) before releasing the
> > sb_writers lock.
> >
> > If new file is on the same fs as old file, acct_pin_kill(old) fail to
> > file_start_write_trylock() and skip writing the old file, because
> > sb_writers (of new) is already taken by acct_on().
> >
> > If new file is not on same fs as old file, this ordering violation
> > creates an unneeded dependency between new sb_writers and old sb_writers,
> > which may later be reported as possible deadlock.
> >
> > This could result in an actual deadlock if acct file is replaced from
> > an old file in overlayfs over "real fs" to a new file in "real fs".
> > acct_on() takes freeze protection on "real fs" and tries to write to
> > overlayfs file. overlayfs is not freeze protected so do_acct_process()
> > can carry on with __kernel_write() to overlayfs file, which would
> > try to take freeze protection on "real fs" and deadlock.
> >
> > Reproducer of lockdep possible deadlock warning:
> >
> > ./run --ov -s # unionmount-testsuite
> > touch /mnt/x /upper/y
> > accton /mnt/x
> > accton /upper/y
> >
> > ======================================================
> > WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
> > 4.19.0-rc1-xfstests #3424 Not tainted
> > ------------------------------------------------------
> > accton/1390 is trying to acquire lock:
> > 00000000e0585aa5 (&acct->lock#2){+.+.}, at: acct_pin_kill+0x1b/0x76
> >
> > but task is already holding lock:
> > 000000003692505a (sb_writers#6){.+.+}, at: mnt_want_write+0x1d/0x42
> >
> > Reported-by: syzbot+695726bc473f9c36a4b6@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
> > Fixes: 59eda0e07f43 ("new fs_pin killing logics")
> > Signed-off-by: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
> > ---
> >
> > Al,
> >
> > Welcome back. It would be nice to get an ACK (or an Applied) on this
> > patch. Fixes label claims to fix your commit, but I believe the bug was
> > already there before your commit.
> >
> > As you can see, I have a reproducer to demonstrate the manifestation of
> > the bug in the case of switching acct file from overlayfs to real fs.
> > This started to manifest with overlayfs stacked f_op.
> > I have made another claim which seems obvious from the code about
> > changing acct file on same fs, but did not bother to write a reproducer
> > for that case.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Amir.
>
> PING
PING^2
>
> >
> > kernel/acct.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/acct.c b/kernel/acct.c
> > index addf7732fb56..c09355a7ae46 100644
> > --- a/kernel/acct.c
> > +++ b/kernel/acct.c
> > @@ -251,8 +251,8 @@ static int acct_on(struct filename *pathname)
> > rcu_read_lock();
> > old = xchg(&ns->bacct, &acct->pin);
> > mutex_unlock(&acct->lock);
> > - pin_kill(old);
> > mnt_drop_write(mnt);
> > + pin_kill(old);
> > mntput(mnt);
> > return 0;
> > }
> > --
> > 2.17.1
> >
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-02-26 14:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-09-29 5:51 [PATCH]i[RESEND] kernel/acct.c: fix locking order when switching acct files Amir Goldstein
2018-10-17 19:39 ` [PATCH][RESEND] " Amir Goldstein
2019-02-26 14:22 ` Amir Goldstein [this message]
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=CAOQ4uxiZJfdRfyKwD1q8RbrT1KTRdLoErpWg0tFnD1fsxg9+Wg@mail.gmail.com \
--to=amir73il@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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).