From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@vrfy.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@gmail.com>,
Lukas Czerner <lczerner@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH] loop: fput() called in loop_clr_fd() may cause bd_mutex recursive locking
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2011 00:53:33 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111217215333.GA3313@swordfish> (raw)
Unmonting mounted with `-o loop' block device causes recursive
bd_mutex locking. fput() calls blkdev_put() for bdev that issued
disk->fops->release() (loop_clr_fd()) call:
[23044.654647] umount/24442 is trying to acquire lock:
[23044.654652] (&bdev->bd_mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff81144311>] blkdev_put+0x1f/0x131
[23044.654670]
[23044.654672] but task is already holding lock:
[23044.654677] (&bdev->bd_mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff811441a1>] __blkdev_put+0x33/0x184
[23044.654690]
[23044.654692] other info that might help us debug this:
[23044.654697] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
[23044.654727]
[23044.654731] 1 lock held by umount/24442:
[23044.654735] #0: (&bdev->bd_mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff811441a1>] __blkdev_put+0x33/0x184
[23044.654748]
[23044.654762] Call Trace:
[23044.654773] [<ffffffff81075611>] __lock_acquire+0x15bf/0x1659
[23044.654784] [<ffffffff8114b3e3>] ? inotify_free_group_priv+0x4f/0x4f
[23044.654792] [<ffffffff81144311>] ? blkdev_put+0x1f/0x131
[23044.654799] [<ffffffff81075c6a>] lock_acquire+0x138/0x1b3
[23044.654807] [<ffffffff81144311>] ? blkdev_put+0x1f/0x131
[23044.654814] [<ffffffff81144311>] ? blkdev_put+0x1f/0x131
[23044.654824] [<ffffffff8147ce67>] mutex_lock_nested+0x5e/0x325
[23044.654831] [<ffffffff81144311>] ? blkdev_put+0x1f/0x131
[23044.654838] [<ffffffff81149963>] ? fsnotify+0x441/0x459
[23044.654846] [<ffffffff81144311>] blkdev_put+0x1f/0x131
[23044.654853] [<ffffffff81144443>] blkdev_close+0x20/0x22
[23044.654863] [<ffffffff81116b21>] fput+0x117/0x1cf
[23044.654874] [<ffffffffa016eb71>] loop_clr_fd+0x1f2/0x201 [loop]
[23044.654882] [<ffffffffa016f861>] lo_release+0x40/0x6f [loop]
[23044.654890] [<ffffffff81144244>] __blkdev_put+0xd6/0x184
[23044.654898] [<ffffffff8114441a>] blkdev_put+0x128/0x131
[23044.654906] [<ffffffff8111704e>] kill_block_super+0x60/0x65
[23044.654914] [<ffffffff81117366>] deactivate_locked_super+0x32/0x63
[23044.654922] [<ffffffff81117cc9>] deactivate_super+0x3a/0x3e
[23044.654931] [<ffffffff8112fc5d>] mntput_no_expire+0xbf/0xc4
[23044.654939] [<ffffffff811309c7>] sys_umount+0x2c5/0x2f3
[23044.654949] [<ffffffff81484b12>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
---
diff --git a/drivers/block/loop.c b/drivers/block/loop.c
index 1e888c9..b004779 100644
--- a/drivers/block/loop.c
+++ b/drivers/block/loop.c
@@ -1028,6 +1028,15 @@ static int loop_clr_fd(struct loop_device *lo)
* lock dependency possibility warning as fput can take
* bd_mutex which is usually taken before lo_ctl_mutex.
*/
+ /*
+ * Need to put file f_op, otherwise fput() may cause
+ * recursive locking on bd_mutex, calling blkdev_put()
+ * for bdev that issued disk->fops->release() call.
+ */
+ if (bdev && bdev == bdev->bd_contains) {
+ fops_put(filp->f_op);
+ filp->f_op = NULL;
+ }
fput(filp);
return 0;
}
next reply other threads:[~2011-12-17 21:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-12-17 21:53 Sergey Senozhatsky [this message]
2011-12-17 22:12 ` [PATCH] loop: fput() called in loop_clr_fd() may cause bd_mutex recursive locking Al Viro
2011-12-17 22:19 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2011-12-17 22:30 ` Al Viro
2011-12-17 22:37 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2011-12-17 22:58 ` Al Viro
2011-12-17 23:20 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2011-12-17 23:38 ` Al Viro
2011-12-17 23:47 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
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=20111217215333.GA3313@swordfish \
--to=sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=kay.sievers@vrfy.org \
--cc=lczerner@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=namhyung@gmail.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.