All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Roland Dreier <rdreier@cisco.com>
Cc: kirkland@canonical.com, ecryptfs-devel@lists.launchpad.net,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] eCryptfs: Fix lockdep-reported AB-BA mutex issue
Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2009 14:20:55 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A4D0897.6060504@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ada63ecdnpp.fsf@cisco.com>

On 07/01/2009 05:48 PM, Roland Dreier wrote:
> Lockdep reports the following valid-looking possible AB-BA deadlock with
> global_auth_tok_list_mutex and keysig_list_mutex:
> 
>   ecryptfs_new_file_context() ->
>       ecryptfs_copy_mount_wide_sigs_to_inode_sigs() ->
>           mutex_lock(&mount_crypt_stat->global_auth_tok_list_mutex);
>           -> ecryptfs_add_keysig() ->
>               mutex_lock(&crypt_stat->keysig_list_mutex);
> 
> vs
> 
>   ecryptfs_generate_key_packet_set() ->
>       mutex_lock(&crypt_stat->keysig_list_mutex);
>       -> ecryptfs_find_global_auth_tok_for_sig() ->
>           mutex_lock(&mount_crypt_stat->global_auth_tok_list_mutex);
> 
> ie the two mutexes are taken in opposite orders in the two different
> code paths.  I'm not sure if this is a real bug where two threads could
> actually hit the two paths in parallel and deadlock, but it at least
> makes lockdep impossible to use with ecryptfs since this report triggers
> every time and disables future lockdep reporting.

After looking at the code paths from a slightly higher level, I don't
think deadlock would ever occur from this issue.  But, there's no need
in keeping it the way it is, especially with it disabling lockdep reporting.

> 
> Since ecryptfs_add_keysig() is called only from the single callsite in
> ecryptfs_copy_mount_wide_sigs_to_inode_sigs(), the simplest fix seems to
> be to move the lock of keysig_list_mutex back up outside of the where
> global_auth_tok_list_mutex is taken.  This patch does that, and fixes
> the lockdep report on my system (and ecryptfs still works OK).

Looks like a reasonable approach.

> 
> The full output of lockdep fixed by this patch is:
> 
> =======================================================
> [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
> 2.6.31-2-generic #14~rbd2
> -------------------------------------------------------
> gdm/2640 is trying to acquire lock:
>  (&mount_crypt_stat->global_auth_tok_list_mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff8121591e>] ecryptfs_find_global_auth_tok_for_sig+0x2e/0x90
> 
> but task is already holding lock:
>  (&crypt_stat->keysig_list_mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff81217728>] ecryptfs_generate_key_packet_set+0x58/0x2b0
> 
> which lock already depends on the new lock.
> 
> the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
> 
> -> #1 (&crypt_stat->keysig_list_mutex){+.+.+.}:
>        [<ffffffff8108c897>] check_prev_add+0x2a7/0x370
>        [<ffffffff8108cfc1>] validate_chain+0x661/0x750
>        [<ffffffff8108d2e7>] __lock_acquire+0x237/0x430
>        [<ffffffff8108d585>] lock_acquire+0xa5/0x150
>        [<ffffffff815526cd>] __mutex_lock_common+0x4d/0x3d0
>        [<ffffffff81552b56>] mutex_lock_nested+0x46/0x60
>        [<ffffffff8121526a>] ecryptfs_add_keysig+0x5a/0xb0
>        [<ffffffff81213299>] ecryptfs_copy_mount_wide_sigs_to_inode_sigs+0x59/0xb0
>        [<ffffffff81214b06>] ecryptfs_new_file_context+0xa6/0x1a0
>        [<ffffffff8120e42a>] ecryptfs_initialize_file+0x4a/0x140
>        [<ffffffff8120e54d>] ecryptfs_create+0x2d/0x60
>        [<ffffffff8113a7d4>] vfs_create+0xb4/0xe0
>        [<ffffffff8113a8c4>] __open_namei_create+0xc4/0x110
>        [<ffffffff8113d1c1>] do_filp_open+0xa01/0xae0
>        [<ffffffff8112d8d9>] do_sys_open+0x69/0x140
>        [<ffffffff8112d9f0>] sys_open+0x20/0x30
>        [<ffffffff81013132>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
>        [<ffffffffffffffff>] 0xffffffffffffffff
> 
> -> #0 (&mount_crypt_stat->global_auth_tok_list_mutex){+.+.+.}:
>        [<ffffffff8108c675>] check_prev_add+0x85/0x370
>        [<ffffffff8108cfc1>] validate_chain+0x661/0x750
>        [<ffffffff8108d2e7>] __lock_acquire+0x237/0x430
>        [<ffffffff8108d585>] lock_acquire+0xa5/0x150
>        [<ffffffff815526cd>] __mutex_lock_common+0x4d/0x3d0
>        [<ffffffff81552b56>] mutex_lock_nested+0x46/0x60
>        [<ffffffff8121591e>] ecryptfs_find_global_auth_tok_for_sig+0x2e/0x90
>        [<ffffffff812177d5>] ecryptfs_generate_key_packet_set+0x105/0x2b0
>        [<ffffffff81212f49>] ecryptfs_write_headers_virt+0xc9/0x120
>        [<ffffffff8121306d>] ecryptfs_write_metadata+0xcd/0x200
>        [<ffffffff8120e44b>] ecryptfs_initialize_file+0x6b/0x140
>        [<ffffffff8120e54d>] ecryptfs_create+0x2d/0x60
>        [<ffffffff8113a7d4>] vfs_create+0xb4/0xe0
>        [<ffffffff8113a8c4>] __open_namei_create+0xc4/0x110
>        [<ffffffff8113d1c1>] do_filp_open+0xa01/0xae0
>        [<ffffffff8112d8d9>] do_sys_open+0x69/0x140
>        [<ffffffff8112d9f0>] sys_open+0x20/0x30
>        [<ffffffff81013132>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
>        [<ffffffffffffffff>] 0xffffffffffffffff
> 
> other info that might help us debug this:
> 
> 2 locks held by gdm/2640:
>  #0:  (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#11){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff8113cb8b>] do_filp_open+0x3cb/0xae0
>  #1:  (&crypt_stat->keysig_list_mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff81217728>] ecryptfs_generate_key_packet_set+0x58/0x2b0
> 
> stack backtrace:
> Pid: 2640, comm: gdm Tainted: G         C 2.6.31-2-generic #14~rbd2
> Call Trace:
>  [<ffffffff8108b988>] print_circular_bug_tail+0xa8/0xf0
>  [<ffffffff8108c675>] check_prev_add+0x85/0x370
>  [<ffffffff81094912>] ? __module_text_address+0x12/0x60
>  [<ffffffff8108cfc1>] validate_chain+0x661/0x750
>  [<ffffffff81017275>] ? print_context_stack+0x85/0x140
>  [<ffffffff81089c68>] ? find_usage_backwards+0x38/0x160
>  [<ffffffff8108d2e7>] __lock_acquire+0x237/0x430
>  [<ffffffff8108d585>] lock_acquire+0xa5/0x150
>  [<ffffffff8121591e>] ? ecryptfs_find_global_auth_tok_for_sig+0x2e/0x90
>  [<ffffffff8108b0b0>] ? check_usage_backwards+0x0/0xb0
>  [<ffffffff815526cd>] __mutex_lock_common+0x4d/0x3d0
>  [<ffffffff8121591e>] ? ecryptfs_find_global_auth_tok_for_sig+0x2e/0x90
>  [<ffffffff8121591e>] ? ecryptfs_find_global_auth_tok_for_sig+0x2e/0x90
>  [<ffffffff8108c02c>] ? mark_held_locks+0x6c/0xa0
>  [<ffffffff81125b0d>] ? kmem_cache_alloc+0xfd/0x1a0
>  [<ffffffff8108c34d>] ? trace_hardirqs_on_caller+0x14d/0x190
>  [<ffffffff81552b56>] mutex_lock_nested+0x46/0x60
>  [<ffffffff8121591e>] ecryptfs_find_global_auth_tok_for_sig+0x2e/0x90
>  [<ffffffff812177d5>] ecryptfs_generate_key_packet_set+0x105/0x2b0
>  [<ffffffff81212f49>] ecryptfs_write_headers_virt+0xc9/0x120
>  [<ffffffff8121306d>] ecryptfs_write_metadata+0xcd/0x200
>  [<ffffffff81210240>] ? ecryptfs_init_persistent_file+0x60/0xe0
>  [<ffffffff8120e44b>] ecryptfs_initialize_file+0x6b/0x140
>  [<ffffffff8120e54d>] ecryptfs_create+0x2d/0x60
>  [<ffffffff8113a7d4>] vfs_create+0xb4/0xe0
>  [<ffffffff8113a8c4>] __open_namei_create+0xc4/0x110
>  [<ffffffff8113d1c1>] do_filp_open+0xa01/0xae0
>  [<ffffffff8129a93e>] ? _raw_spin_unlock+0x5e/0xb0
>  [<ffffffff8155410b>] ? _spin_unlock+0x2b/0x40
>  [<ffffffff81139e9b>] ? getname+0x3b/0x240
>  [<ffffffff81148a5a>] ? alloc_fd+0xfa/0x140
>  [<ffffffff8112d8d9>] do_sys_open+0x69/0x140
>  [<ffffffff81553b8f>] ? trace_hardirqs_on_thunk+0x3a/0x3f
>  [<ffffffff8112d9f0>] sys_open+0x20/0x30
>  [<ffffffff81013132>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
> 
> Signed-off-by: Roland Dreier <rolandd@cisco.com>
> ---
>  fs/ecryptfs/crypto.c   |    8 +++++---
>  fs/ecryptfs/keystore.c |   11 ++++-------
>  2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/ecryptfs/crypto.c b/fs/ecryptfs/crypto.c
> index b91851f..1920a9a 100644
> --- a/fs/ecryptfs/crypto.c
> +++ b/fs/ecryptfs/crypto.c
> @@ -925,7 +925,9 @@ static int ecryptfs_copy_mount_wide_sigs_to_inode_sigs(
>  	struct ecryptfs_global_auth_tok *global_auth_tok;
>  	int rc = 0;
> 
> +	mutex_lock(&crypt_stat->keysig_list_mutex);
>  	mutex_lock(&mount_crypt_stat->global_auth_tok_list_mutex);
> +
>  	list_for_each_entry(global_auth_tok,
>  			    &mount_crypt_stat->global_auth_tok_list,
>  			    mount_crypt_stat_list) {
> @@ -934,13 +936,13 @@ static int ecryptfs_copy_mount_wide_sigs_to_inode_sigs(
>  		rc = ecryptfs_add_keysig(crypt_stat, global_auth_tok->sig);
>  		if (rc) {
>  			printk(KERN_ERR "Error adding keysig; rc = [%d]\n", rc);
> -			mutex_unlock(
> -				&mount_crypt_stat->global_auth_tok_list_mutex);
>  			goto out;
>  		}
>  	}
> -	mutex_unlock(&mount_crypt_stat->global_auth_tok_list_mutex);
> +
>  out:
> +	mutex_unlock(&mount_crypt_stat->global_auth_tok_list_mutex);
> +	mutex_unlock(&crypt_stat->keysig_list_mutex);
>  	return rc;
>  }
> 
> diff --git a/fs/ecryptfs/keystore.c b/fs/ecryptfs/keystore.c
> index af737bb..e85ca8e 100644
> --- a/fs/ecryptfs/keystore.c
> +++ b/fs/ecryptfs/keystore.c
> @@ -2353,21 +2353,18 @@ struct kmem_cache *ecryptfs_key_sig_cache;
>  int ecryptfs_add_keysig(struct ecryptfs_crypt_stat *crypt_stat, char *sig)
>  {
>  	struct ecryptfs_key_sig *new_key_sig;
> -	int rc = 0;
> 
>  	new_key_sig = kmem_cache_alloc(ecryptfs_key_sig_cache, GFP_KERNEL);
>  	if (!new_key_sig) {
> -		rc = -ENOMEM;
>  		printk(KERN_ERR
>  		       "Error allocating from ecryptfs_key_sig_cache\n");
> -		goto out;
> +		return -ENOMEM;
>  	}
>  	memcpy(new_key_sig->keysig, sig, ECRYPTFS_SIG_SIZE_HEX);
> -	mutex_lock(&crypt_stat->keysig_list_mutex);
> +	/* Caller must hold keysig_list_mutex */
>  	list_add(&new_key_sig->crypt_stat_list, &crypt_stat->keysig_list);
> -	mutex_unlock(&crypt_stat->keysig_list_mutex);
> -out:
> -	return rc;
> +
> +	return 0;
>  }
> 
>  struct kmem_cache *ecryptfs_global_auth_tok_cache;

This patch looks good.  I really appreciate you tracking down and fixing
this problem.  It will take me a little bit longer before I can get to
the other 2 patches.

Tyler

  reply	other threads:[~2009-07-02 19:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-07-01 17:06 lockdep reported AB-BA problem in ecryptfs Roland Dreier
2009-07-01 22:48 ` [PATCH] eCryptfs: Fix lockdep-reported AB-BA mutex issue Roland Dreier
2009-07-02 19:20   ` Tyler Hicks [this message]
2009-07-04 22:04     ` Roland Dreier
2009-07-01 23:08 ` Another lockdep issue reported with ecryptfs Roland Dreier
2009-07-02  0:31   ` Roland Dreier
2009-07-02  0:41   ` Yet another " Roland Dreier
2009-07-02  3:58     ` Roland Dreier

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=4A4D0897.6060504@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=tyhicks@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=ecryptfs-devel@lists.launchpad.net \
    --cc=kirkland@canonical.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rdreier@cisco.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.