All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@kernel.org>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, linux-block@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: [PATCH v2] block: Prevent potential deadlock in blk_revalidate_disk_zones()
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2024 19:47:05 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20241126104705.183996-1-dlemoal@kernel.org> (raw)

The function blk_revalidate_disk_zones() calls the function
disk_update_zone_resources() after freezing the device queue. In turn,
disk_update_zone_resources() calls queue_limits_start_update() which
takes a queue limits mutex lock, resulting in the ordering:
q->q_usage_counter check -> q->limits_lock. However, the usual ordering
is to always take a queue limit lock before freezing the queue to commit
the limits updates, e.g., the code pattern:

lim = queue_limits_start_update(q);
...
blk_mq_freeze_queue(q);
ret = queue_limits_commit_update(q, &lim);
blk_mq_unfreeze_queue(q);

Thus, blk_revalidate_disk_zones() introduces a potential circular
locking dependency deadlock that lockdep sometimes catches with the
splat:

[   51.934109] ======================================================
[   51.935916] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
[   51.937561] 6.12.0+ #2107 Not tainted
[   51.938648] ------------------------------------------------------
[   51.940351] kworker/u16:4/157 is trying to acquire lock:
[   51.941805] ffff9fff0aa0bea8 (&q->limits_lock){+.+.}-{4:4}, at: disk_update_zone_resources+0x86/0x170
[   51.944314]
               but task is already holding lock:
[   51.945688] ffff9fff0aa0b890 (&q->q_usage_counter(queue)#3){++++}-{0:0}, at: blk_revalidate_disk_zones+0x15f/0x340
[   51.948527]
               which lock already depends on the new lock.

[   51.951296]
               the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
[   51.953708]
               -> #1 (&q->q_usage_counter(queue)#3){++++}-{0:0}:
[   51.956131]        blk_queue_enter+0x1c9/0x1e0
[   51.957290]        blk_mq_alloc_request+0x187/0x2a0
[   51.958365]        scsi_execute_cmd+0x78/0x490 [scsi_mod]
[   51.959514]        read_capacity_16+0x111/0x410 [sd_mod]
[   51.960693]        sd_revalidate_disk.isra.0+0x872/0x3240 [sd_mod]
[   51.962004]        sd_probe+0x2d7/0x520 [sd_mod]
[   51.962993]        really_probe+0xd5/0x330
[   51.963898]        __driver_probe_device+0x78/0x110
[   51.964925]        driver_probe_device+0x1f/0xa0
[   51.965916]        __driver_attach_async_helper+0x60/0xe0
[   51.967017]        async_run_entry_fn+0x2e/0x140
[   51.968004]        process_one_work+0x21f/0x5a0
[   51.968987]        worker_thread+0x1dc/0x3c0
[   51.969868]        kthread+0xe0/0x110
[   51.970377]        ret_from_fork+0x31/0x50
[   51.970983]        ret_from_fork_asm+0x11/0x20
[   51.971587]
               -> #0 (&q->limits_lock){+.+.}-{4:4}:
[   51.972479]        __lock_acquire+0x1337/0x2130
[   51.973133]        lock_acquire+0xc5/0x2d0
[   51.973691]        __mutex_lock+0xda/0xcf0
[   51.974300]        disk_update_zone_resources+0x86/0x170
[   51.975032]        blk_revalidate_disk_zones+0x16c/0x340
[   51.975740]        sd_zbc_revalidate_zones+0x73/0x160 [sd_mod]
[   51.976524]        sd_revalidate_disk.isra.0+0x465/0x3240 [sd_mod]
[   51.977824]        sd_probe+0x2d7/0x520 [sd_mod]
[   51.978917]        really_probe+0xd5/0x330
[   51.979915]        __driver_probe_device+0x78/0x110
[   51.981047]        driver_probe_device+0x1f/0xa0
[   51.982143]        __driver_attach_async_helper+0x60/0xe0
[   51.983282]        async_run_entry_fn+0x2e/0x140
[   51.984319]        process_one_work+0x21f/0x5a0
[   51.985873]        worker_thread+0x1dc/0x3c0
[   51.987289]        kthread+0xe0/0x110
[   51.988546]        ret_from_fork+0x31/0x50
[   51.989926]        ret_from_fork_asm+0x11/0x20
[   51.991376]
               other info that might help us debug this:

[   51.994127]  Possible unsafe locking scenario:

[   51.995651]        CPU0                    CPU1
[   51.996694]        ----                    ----
[   51.997716]   lock(&q->q_usage_counter(queue)#3);
[   51.998817]                                lock(&q->limits_lock);
[   52.000043]                                lock(&q->q_usage_counter(queue)#3);
[   52.001638]   lock(&q->limits_lock);
[   52.002485]
                *** DEADLOCK ***

Prevent this issue by moving the calls to blk_mq_freeze_queue() and
blk_mq_unfreeze_queue() around the call to queue_limits_commit_update()
in disk_update_zone_resources(). In case of revalidation failure, the
call to disk_free_zone_resources() in blk_revalidate_disk_zones()
is still done with the queue frozen as before.

Fixes: 843283e96e5a ("block: Fake max open zones limit when there is no limit")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@kernel.org>
---
 block/blk-zoned.c | 14 ++++++++++----
 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/block/blk-zoned.c b/block/blk-zoned.c
index 70211751df16..263e28b72053 100644
--- a/block/blk-zoned.c
+++ b/block/blk-zoned.c
@@ -1551,6 +1551,7 @@ static int disk_update_zone_resources(struct gendisk *disk,
 	unsigned int nr_seq_zones, nr_conv_zones;
 	unsigned int pool_size;
 	struct queue_limits lim;
+	int ret;
 
 	disk->nr_zones = args->nr_zones;
 	disk->zone_capacity = args->zone_capacity;
@@ -1601,7 +1602,11 @@ static int disk_update_zone_resources(struct gendisk *disk,
 	}
 
 commit:
-	return queue_limits_commit_update(q, &lim);
+	blk_mq_freeze_queue(q);
+	ret = queue_limits_commit_update(q, &lim);
+	blk_mq_unfreeze_queue(q);
+
+	return ret;
 }
 
 static int blk_revalidate_conv_zone(struct blk_zone *zone, unsigned int idx,
@@ -1816,14 +1821,15 @@ int blk_revalidate_disk_zones(struct gendisk *disk)
 	 * Set the new disk zone parameters only once the queue is frozen and
 	 * all I/Os are completed.
 	 */
-	blk_mq_freeze_queue(q);
 	if (ret > 0)
 		ret = disk_update_zone_resources(disk, &args);
 	else
 		pr_warn("%s: failed to revalidate zones\n", disk->disk_name);
-	if (ret)
+	if (ret) {
+		blk_mq_freeze_queue(q);
 		disk_free_zone_resources(disk);
-	blk_mq_unfreeze_queue(q);
+		blk_mq_unfreeze_queue(q);
+	}
 
 	return ret;
 }
-- 
2.47.0


             reply	other threads:[~2024-11-26 10:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-11-26 10:47 Damien Le Moal [this message]
2024-11-26 11:01 ` [PATCH v2] block: Prevent potential deadlock in blk_revalidate_disk_zones() Christoph Hellwig
2024-11-26 15:00 ` Jens Axboe

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=20241126104705.183996-1-dlemoal@kernel.org \
    --to=dlemoal@kernel.org \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.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 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.