From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Ciprian Docan <docan@eden.rutgers.edu>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
Subject: [PATCH] vfs: don't hold s_umount over close_bdev_exclusive() call
Date: Sat, 22 May 2010 16:52:20 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4BF7EFA4.4050901@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100521141445.bae41292.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
This patch fixes an obscure AB-BA deadlock in get_sb_bdev().
When a superblock is mounted more than once get_sb_bdev() calls
close_bdev_exclusive() to drop the extra bdev reference while holding
s_umount. However, sb->s_umount nests inside bd_mutex during
__invalidate_device() and close_bdev_exclusive() acquires bd_mutex
during blkdev_put(); thus creating an AB-BA deadlock.
This condition doesn't trigger frequently. For this condition to be
visible to lockdep, the filesystem must occupy the whole device (as
__invalidate_device() only grabs bd_mutex for the whole device), the
FS must be mounted more than once and partition rescan should be
issued while the FS is still mounted.
Fix it by dropping s_umount over close_bdev_exclusive().
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Reported-by: Ciprian Docan <docan@eden.rutgers.edu>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
---
I think this fix is safe and seems to work fine here but I dunno know
the locking too well, so it would be best not to push it w/o Al's ack.
Thanks.
fs/super.c | 9 +++++++++
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
diff --git a/fs/super.c b/fs/super.c
index 1527e6a..667f706 100644
--- a/fs/super.c
+++ b/fs/super.c
@@ -821,7 +821,16 @@ int get_sb_bdev(struct file_system_type *fs_type,
goto error_bdev;
}
+ /*
+ * s_umount nests inside bd_mutex during
+ * __invalidate_device(). close_bdev_exclusive()
+ * acquires bd_mutex and can't be called under
+ * s_umount. Drop s_umount temporarily. This is safe
+ * as we're holding an active reference.
+ */
+ up_write(&s->s_umount);
close_bdev_exclusive(bdev, mode);
+ down_write(&s->s_umount);
} else {
char b[BDEVNAME_SIZE];
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-05-22 14:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-05-20 16:34 possible circular locking dependency detected Ciprian Docan
2010-05-21 21:14 ` Andrew Morton
2010-05-22 14:52 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2010-05-25 8:30 ` [PATCH] vfs: don't hold s_umount over close_bdev_exclusive() call Jens Axboe
2010-05-27 4:45 ` Al Viro
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=4BF7EFA4.4050901@kernel.org \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=docan@eden.rutgers.edu \
--cc=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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.