From: syzbot <syzbot+4ac2fe2b496abca8fa4b@syzkaller.appspotmail.com>
To: andrii@kernel.org, ast@kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
daniel@iogearbox.net, davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com,
jakub@cloudflare.com, john.fastabend@gmail.com, kuba@kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
pabeni@redhat.com, syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [syzbot] [bpf?] [net?] possible deadlock in sock_map_delete_elem
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2024 18:13:25 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <000000000000a69fc506174613ad@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <000000000000233ab00613f17f99@google.com>
syzbot has found a reproducer for the following issue on:
HEAD commit: ba1cb99b559e Merge branch 'vxlan-stats'
git tree: net
console+strace: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/log.txt?x=176b097f180000
kernel config: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/.config?x=98d5a8e00ed1044a
dashboard link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=4ac2fe2b496abca8fa4b
compiler: Debian clang version 15.0.6, GNU ld (GNU Binutils for Debian) 2.40
syz repro: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/repro.syz?x=10795c90980000
C reproducer: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/repro.c?x=114465e8980000
Downloadable assets:
disk image: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/a5f29f03f4a8/disk-ba1cb99b.raw.xz
vmlinux: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/b1a9f6891628/vmlinux-ba1cb99b.xz
kernel image: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/2f21db47d56d/bzImage-ba1cb99b.xz
IMPORTANT: if you fix the issue, please add the following tag to the commit:
Reported-by: syzbot+4ac2fe2b496abca8fa4b@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
======================================================
WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
6.9.0-rc5-syzkaller-00184-gba1cb99b559e #0 Not tainted
------------------------------------------------------
kworker/u8:6/1269 is trying to acquire lock:
ffff88807e310200 (&stab->lock){+...}-{2:2}, at: spin_lock_bh include/linux/spinlock.h:356 [inline]
ffff88807e310200 (&stab->lock){+...}-{2:2}, at: __sock_map_delete net/core/sock_map.c:417 [inline]
ffff88807e310200 (&stab->lock){+...}-{2:2}, at: sock_map_delete_elem+0x175/0x250 net/core/sock_map.c:449
but task is already holding lock:
ffff888024253290 (&psock->link_lock){+...}-{2:2}, at: spin_lock_bh include/linux/spinlock.h:356 [inline]
ffff888024253290 (&psock->link_lock){+...}-{2:2}, at: sock_map_del_link net/core/sock_map.c:145 [inline]
ffff888024253290 (&psock->link_lock){+...}-{2:2}, at: sock_map_unref+0xcc/0x5e0 net/core/sock_map.c:180
which lock already depends on the new lock.
the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
-> #1 (&psock->link_lock){+...}-{2:2}:
lock_acquire+0x1ed/0x550 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5754
__raw_spin_lock_bh include/linux/spinlock_api_smp.h:126 [inline]
_raw_spin_lock_bh+0x35/0x50 kernel/locking/spinlock.c:178
spin_lock_bh include/linux/spinlock.h:356 [inline]
sock_map_add_link net/core/sock_map.c:134 [inline]
sock_map_update_common+0x31c/0x5b0 net/core/sock_map.c:503
sock_map_update_elem_sys+0x55f/0x910 net/core/sock_map.c:582
map_update_elem+0x53a/0x6f0 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:1641
__sys_bpf+0x76f/0x810 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:5648
__do_sys_bpf kernel/bpf/syscall.c:5767 [inline]
__se_sys_bpf kernel/bpf/syscall.c:5765 [inline]
__x64_sys_bpf+0x7c/0x90 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:5765
do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/common.c:52 [inline]
do_syscall_64+0xf5/0x240 arch/x86/entry/common.c:83
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
-> #0 (&stab->lock){+...}-{2:2}:
check_prev_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3134 [inline]
check_prevs_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3253 [inline]
validate_chain+0x18cb/0x58e0 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3869
__lock_acquire+0x1346/0x1fd0 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5137
lock_acquire+0x1ed/0x550 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5754
__raw_spin_lock_bh include/linux/spinlock_api_smp.h:126 [inline]
_raw_spin_lock_bh+0x35/0x50 kernel/locking/spinlock.c:178
spin_lock_bh include/linux/spinlock.h:356 [inline]
__sock_map_delete net/core/sock_map.c:417 [inline]
sock_map_delete_elem+0x175/0x250 net/core/sock_map.c:449
0xffffffffa00020cb
bpf_dispatcher_nop_func include/linux/bpf.h:1234 [inline]
__bpf_prog_run include/linux/filter.h:657 [inline]
bpf_prog_run include/linux/filter.h:664 [inline]
__bpf_trace_run kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c:2381 [inline]
bpf_trace_run2+0x204/0x420 kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c:2420
__traceiter_kfree+0x2b/0x50 include/trace/events/kmem.h:94
trace_kfree include/trace/events/kmem.h:94 [inline]
kfree+0x2af/0x3a0 mm/slub.c:4377
sk_psock_free_link include/linux/skmsg.h:421 [inline]
sock_map_del_link net/core/sock_map.c:158 [inline]
sock_map_unref+0x3ac/0x5e0 net/core/sock_map.c:180
sock_map_free+0x1e7/0x3e0 net/core/sock_map.c:351
bpf_map_free_deferred+0xe6/0x110 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:734
process_one_work kernel/workqueue.c:3254 [inline]
process_scheduled_works+0xa10/0x17c0 kernel/workqueue.c:3335
worker_thread+0x86d/0xd70 kernel/workqueue.c:3416
kthread+0x2f0/0x390 kernel/kthread.c:388
ret_from_fork+0x4b/0x80 arch/x86/kernel/process.c:147
ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30 arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:244
other info that might help us debug this:
Possible unsafe locking scenario:
CPU0 CPU1
---- ----
lock(&psock->link_lock);
lock(&stab->lock);
lock(&psock->link_lock);
lock(&stab->lock);
*** DEADLOCK ***
6 locks held by kworker/u8:6/1269:
#0: ffff888015089148 ((wq_completion)events_unbound){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: process_one_work kernel/workqueue.c:3229 [inline]
#0: ffff888015089148 ((wq_completion)events_unbound){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: process_scheduled_works+0x8e0/0x17c0 kernel/workqueue.c:3335
#1: ffffc90005557d00 ((work_completion)(&map->work)){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: process_one_work kernel/workqueue.c:3230 [inline]
#1: ffffc90005557d00 ((work_completion)(&map->work)){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: process_scheduled_works+0x91b/0x17c0 kernel/workqueue.c:3335
#2: ffff888023be2258 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: lock_sock include/net/sock.h:1673 [inline]
#2: ffff888023be2258 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: sock_map_free+0x11e/0x3e0 net/core/sock_map.c:349
#3: ffffffff8e334d20 (rcu_read_lock){....}-{1:2}, at: rcu_lock_acquire include/linux/rcupdate.h:329 [inline]
#3: ffffffff8e334d20 (rcu_read_lock){....}-{1:2}, at: rcu_read_lock include/linux/rcupdate.h:781 [inline]
#3: ffffffff8e334d20 (rcu_read_lock){....}-{1:2}, at: sock_map_free+0x12a/0x3e0 net/core/sock_map.c:350
#4: ffff888024253290 (&psock->link_lock){+...}-{2:2}, at: spin_lock_bh include/linux/spinlock.h:356 [inline]
#4: ffff888024253290 (&psock->link_lock){+...}-{2:2}, at: sock_map_del_link net/core/sock_map.c:145 [inline]
#4: ffff888024253290 (&psock->link_lock){+...}-{2:2}, at: sock_map_unref+0xcc/0x5e0 net/core/sock_map.c:180
#5: ffffffff8e334d20 (rcu_read_lock){....}-{1:2}, at: rcu_lock_acquire include/linux/rcupdate.h:329 [inline]
#5: ffffffff8e334d20 (rcu_read_lock){....}-{1:2}, at: rcu_read_lock include/linux/rcupdate.h:781 [inline]
#5: ffffffff8e334d20 (rcu_read_lock){....}-{1:2}, at: __bpf_trace_run kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c:2380 [inline]
#5: ffffffff8e334d20 (rcu_read_lock){....}-{1:2}, at: bpf_trace_run2+0x114/0x420 kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c:2420
stack backtrace:
CPU: 1 PID: 1269 Comm: kworker/u8:6 Not tainted 6.9.0-rc5-syzkaller-00184-gba1cb99b559e #0
Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 03/27/2024
Workqueue: events_unbound bpf_map_free_deferred
Call Trace:
<TASK>
__dump_stack lib/dump_stack.c:88 [inline]
dump_stack_lvl+0x241/0x360 lib/dump_stack.c:114
check_noncircular+0x36a/0x4a0 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:2187
check_prev_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3134 [inline]
check_prevs_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3253 [inline]
validate_chain+0x18cb/0x58e0 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3869
__lock_acquire+0x1346/0x1fd0 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5137
lock_acquire+0x1ed/0x550 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5754
__raw_spin_lock_bh include/linux/spinlock_api_smp.h:126 [inline]
_raw_spin_lock_bh+0x35/0x50 kernel/locking/spinlock.c:178
spin_lock_bh include/linux/spinlock.h:356 [inline]
__sock_map_delete net/core/sock_map.c:417 [inline]
sock_map_delete_elem+0x175/0x250 net/core/sock_map.c:449
</TASK>
---
If you want syzbot to run the reproducer, reply with:
#syz test: git://repo/address.git branch-or-commit-hash
If you attach or paste a git patch, syzbot will apply it before testing.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-30 1:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-03-18 16:03 [syzbot] [bpf?] [net?] possible deadlock in sock_map_delete_elem syzbot
2024-04-30 1:13 ` syzbot [this message]
2024-07-18 9:25 ` syzbot
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=000000000000a69fc506174613ad@google.com \
--to=syzbot+4ac2fe2b496abca8fa4b@syzkaller.appspotmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=jakub@cloudflare.com \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.