All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Daniel Wagner <wagi@monom.org>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: deadlock between &type->i_mutex_dir_key#4 and &xfs_dir_ilock_class
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2015 06:40:16 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150330194016.GC28621@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5518FB4A.4070200@monom.org>

On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 09:29:14AM +0200, Daniel Wagner wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Just my test box booted 4.0.0-rc6 and I was greeted by:
> 
> 
> [Mar30 10:10] ======================================================
> [  +0.000043] [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
> [  +0.000045] 4.0.0-rc6 #32 Not tainted
> [  +0.000027] -------------------------------------------------------
> [  +0.000042] ls/1709 is trying to acquire lock:
> [  +0.000034]  (&mm->mmap_sem){++++++}, at: [<ffffffff811e62cf>] might_fault+0x5f/0xb0
> [  +0.000083] 
> but task is already holding lock:
> [  +0.000043]  (&xfs_dir_ilock_class){.+.+..}, at: [<ffffffffa0424902>] xfs_ilock+0xc2/0x130 [xfs]
> [  +0.000110] 
> which lock already depends on the new lock.

No deadlock. Problem is the shmem code, which is doing inode
instantiation under the mmap_sem, thereby inverting the entire vfs
locking order w.r.t. to the mmap_sem....

i.e. this one:

> -> #1 (&isec->lock){+.+.+.}:
> [  +0.000045]        [<ffffffff810ef987>] lock_acquire+0xc7/0x160
> [  +0.000045]        [<ffffffff817e273d>] mutex_lock_nested+0x7d/0x450
> [  +0.000045]        [<ffffffff8135a755>] inode_doinit_with_dentry+0xc5/0x6a0
> [  +0.000050]        [<ffffffff8135b91c>] selinux_d_instantiate+0x1c/0x20
> [  +0.001072]        [<ffffffff8134ef9b>] security_d_instantiate+0x1b/0x30
> [  +0.001056]        [<ffffffff81255454>] d_instantiate+0x54/0x80
> [  +0.001052]        [<ffffffff811d24bc>] __shmem_file_setup+0xdc/0x250
> [  +0.001059]        [<ffffffff811d5fd8>] shmem_zero_setup+0x28/0x70
> [  +0.001074]        [<ffffffff811f2168>] mmap_region+0x5d8/0x5f0
> [  +0.001045]        [<ffffffff811f249b>] do_mmap_pgoff+0x31b/0x400
> [  +0.001040]        [<ffffffff811d6540>] vm_mmap_pgoff+0xb0/0xf0
> [  +0.001015]        [<ffffffff811f07e6>] SyS_mmap_pgoff+0x116/0x2b0
> [  +0.001009]        [<ffffffff8101bc12>] SyS_mmap+0x22/0x30
> [  +0.001000]        [<ffffffff817e7589>] system_call_fastpath+0x12/0x17

vm_mmap_pgoff() takes the mmap_sem.

> I tried to find out if this was reported before but I
> haven't found anything. If I missed it I am sorry for the noise.

It's been reported so many times I need a FAQ entry for it. problem
is, i can't fix it easily because it's a shmem bug...

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Daniel Wagner <wagi@monom.org>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: deadlock between &type->i_mutex_dir_key#4 and &xfs_dir_ilock_class
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2015 06:40:16 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150330194016.GC28621@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5518FB4A.4070200@monom.org>

On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 09:29:14AM +0200, Daniel Wagner wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Just my test box booted 4.0.0-rc6 and I was greeted by:
> 
> 
> [Mar30 10:10] ======================================================
> [  +0.000043] [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
> [  +0.000045] 4.0.0-rc6 #32 Not tainted
> [  +0.000027] -------------------------------------------------------
> [  +0.000042] ls/1709 is trying to acquire lock:
> [  +0.000034]  (&mm->mmap_sem){++++++}, at: [<ffffffff811e62cf>] might_fault+0x5f/0xb0
> [  +0.000083] 
> but task is already holding lock:
> [  +0.000043]  (&xfs_dir_ilock_class){.+.+..}, at: [<ffffffffa0424902>] xfs_ilock+0xc2/0x130 [xfs]
> [  +0.000110] 
> which lock already depends on the new lock.

No deadlock. Problem is the shmem code, which is doing inode
instantiation under the mmap_sem, thereby inverting the entire vfs
locking order w.r.t. to the mmap_sem....

i.e. this one:

> -> #1 (&isec->lock){+.+.+.}:
> [  +0.000045]        [<ffffffff810ef987>] lock_acquire+0xc7/0x160
> [  +0.000045]        [<ffffffff817e273d>] mutex_lock_nested+0x7d/0x450
> [  +0.000045]        [<ffffffff8135a755>] inode_doinit_with_dentry+0xc5/0x6a0
> [  +0.000050]        [<ffffffff8135b91c>] selinux_d_instantiate+0x1c/0x20
> [  +0.001072]        [<ffffffff8134ef9b>] security_d_instantiate+0x1b/0x30
> [  +0.001056]        [<ffffffff81255454>] d_instantiate+0x54/0x80
> [  +0.001052]        [<ffffffff811d24bc>] __shmem_file_setup+0xdc/0x250
> [  +0.001059]        [<ffffffff811d5fd8>] shmem_zero_setup+0x28/0x70
> [  +0.001074]        [<ffffffff811f2168>] mmap_region+0x5d8/0x5f0
> [  +0.001045]        [<ffffffff811f249b>] do_mmap_pgoff+0x31b/0x400
> [  +0.001040]        [<ffffffff811d6540>] vm_mmap_pgoff+0xb0/0xf0
> [  +0.001015]        [<ffffffff811f07e6>] SyS_mmap_pgoff+0x116/0x2b0
> [  +0.001009]        [<ffffffff8101bc12>] SyS_mmap+0x22/0x30
> [  +0.001000]        [<ffffffff817e7589>] system_call_fastpath+0x12/0x17

vm_mmap_pgoff() takes the mmap_sem.

> I tried to find out if this was reported before but I
> haven't found anything. If I missed it I am sorry for the noise.

It's been reported so many times I need a FAQ entry for it. problem
is, i can't fix it easily because it's a shmem bug...

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

  reply	other threads:[~2015-03-30 19:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-03-30  7:29 deadlock between &type->i_mutex_dir_key#4 and &xfs_dir_ilock_class Daniel Wagner
2015-03-30  7:29 ` Daniel Wagner
2015-03-30 19:40 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2015-03-30 19:40   ` Dave Chinner

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=20150330194016.GC28621@dastard \
    --to=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=wagi@monom.org \
    --cc=xfs@oss.sgi.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.