From: syzbot <syzbot+5a878c984150fad34185@syzkaller.appspotmail.com>
To: andrii@kernel.org, ast@kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
daniel@iogearbox.net, eddyz87@gmail.com, haoluo@google.com,
john.fastabend@gmail.com, jolsa@kernel.org, kpsingh@kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, martin.lau@linux.dev,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, sdf@fomichev.me, song@kernel.org,
syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com, yonghong.song@linux.dev
Subject: [syzbot] [bpf?] possible deadlock in __put_partials
Date: Fri, 04 Oct 2024 04:40:24 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <66ffd428.050a0220.49194.048a.GAE@google.com> (raw)
Hello,
syzbot found the following issue on:
HEAD commit: 99a648c951ba selftests/bpf: Verify that sync_linked_regs p..
git tree: bpf
console output: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/log.txt?x=1668bd07980000
kernel config: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/.config?x=d3e39725ec0dfcbc
dashboard link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=5a878c984150fad34185
compiler: Debian clang version 15.0.6, GNU ld (GNU Binutils for Debian) 2.40
Unfortunately, I don't have any reproducer for this issue yet.
Downloadable assets:
disk image: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/e45f24c2d262/disk-99a648c9.raw.xz
vmlinux: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/48ad218fc65c/vmlinux-99a648c9.xz
kernel image: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/691b40913107/bzImage-99a648c9.xz
IMPORTANT: if you fix the issue, please add the following tag to the commit:
Reported-by: syzbot+5a878c984150fad34185@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
tun0: tun_chr_ioctl cmd 1074025681
======================================================
WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
6.11.0-syzkaller-10550-g99a648c951ba #0 Not tainted
------------------------------------------------------
syz.0.924/9009 is trying to acquire lock:
ffff8881404006d8 (&n->list_lock){-.-.}-{2:2}, at: __put_partials+0x61/0x130 mm/slub.c:3126
but task is already holding lock:
ffff8880758dda00 (&trie->lock){-.-.}-{2:2}, at: trie_update_elem+0xc8/0xc00 kernel/bpf/lpm_trie.c:333
which lock already depends on the new lock.
the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
-> #1 (&trie->lock){-.-.}-{2:2}:
lock_acquire+0x1ed/0x550 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5822
__raw_spin_lock_irqsave include/linux/spinlock_api_smp.h:110 [inline]
_raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0xd5/0x120 kernel/locking/spinlock.c:162
trie_delete_elem+0x96/0x6a0 kernel/bpf/lpm_trie.c:462
0xffffffffa00021b3
bpf_dispatcher_nop_func include/linux/bpf.h:1257 [inline]
__bpf_prog_run include/linux/filter.h:701 [inline]
bpf_prog_run include/linux/filter.h:708 [inline]
__bpf_trace_run kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c:2318 [inline]
bpf_trace_run2+0x2ec/0x540 kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c:2359
trace_contention_end+0x114/0x140 include/trace/events/lock.h:122
__pv_queued_spin_lock_slowpath+0xb7e/0xdb0 kernel/locking/qspinlock.c:557
pv_queued_spin_lock_slowpath arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt.h:584 [inline]
queued_spin_lock_slowpath+0x42/0x50 arch/x86/include/asm/qspinlock.h:51
queued_spin_lock include/asm-generic/qspinlock.h:114 [inline]
do_raw_spin_lock+0x272/0x370 kernel/locking/spinlock_debug.c:116
__raw_spin_lock_irqsave include/linux/spinlock_api_smp.h:111 [inline]
_raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0xe1/0x120 kernel/locking/spinlock.c:162
__put_partials+0x61/0x130 mm/slub.c:3126
put_cpu_partial+0x17c/0x250 mm/slub.c:3221
__slab_free+0x2ea/0x3d0 mm/slub.c:4450
qlink_free mm/kasan/quarantine.c:163 [inline]
qlist_free_all+0x9a/0x140 mm/kasan/quarantine.c:179
kasan_quarantine_reduce+0x14f/0x170 mm/kasan/quarantine.c:286
__kasan_slab_alloc+0x23/0x80 mm/kasan/common.c:329
kasan_slab_alloc include/linux/kasan.h:247 [inline]
slab_post_alloc_hook mm/slub.c:4086 [inline]
slab_alloc_node mm/slub.c:4135 [inline]
kmem_cache_alloc_node_noprof+0x16b/0x320 mm/slub.c:4187
perf_event_alloc+0x166/0x2310 kernel/events/core.c:12147
__do_sys_perf_event_open kernel/events/core.c:12767 [inline]
__se_sys_perf_event_open+0xb1f/0x3870 kernel/events/core.c:12658
do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/common.c:52 [inline]
do_syscall_64+0xf3/0x230 arch/x86/entry/common.c:83
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
-> #0 (&n->list_lock){-.-.}-{2:2}:
check_prev_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3158 [inline]
check_prevs_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3277 [inline]
validate_chain+0x18ef/0x5920 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3901
__lock_acquire+0x1384/0x2050 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5199
lock_acquire+0x1ed/0x550 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5822
__raw_spin_lock_irqsave include/linux/spinlock_api_smp.h:110 [inline]
_raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0xd5/0x120 kernel/locking/spinlock.c:162
__put_partials+0x61/0x130 mm/slub.c:3126
___slab_alloc+0x4f7/0x14b0 mm/slub.c:3776
__slab_alloc+0x58/0xa0 mm/slub.c:3909
__slab_alloc_node mm/slub.c:3962 [inline]
slab_alloc_node mm/slub.c:4123 [inline]
__do_kmalloc_node mm/slub.c:4264 [inline]
__kmalloc_node_noprof+0x286/0x440 mm/slub.c:4271
kmalloc_array_node_noprof include/linux/slab.h:995 [inline]
alloc_slab_obj_exts mm/slub.c:1969 [inline]
account_slab mm/slub.c:2542 [inline]
allocate_slab+0xb6/0x2f0 mm/slub.c:2597
new_slab mm/slub.c:2632 [inline]
___slab_alloc+0xcd1/0x14b0 mm/slub.c:3819
__slab_alloc+0x58/0xa0 mm/slub.c:3909
__slab_alloc_node mm/slub.c:3962 [inline]
slab_alloc_node mm/slub.c:4123 [inline]
__do_kmalloc_node mm/slub.c:4264 [inline]
__kmalloc_node_noprof+0x286/0x440 mm/slub.c:4271
kmalloc_node_noprof include/linux/slab.h:905 [inline]
bpf_map_kmalloc_node+0xd3/0x1c0 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:422
lpm_trie_node_alloc kernel/bpf/lpm_trie.c:299 [inline]
trie_update_elem+0x1cd/0xc00 kernel/bpf/lpm_trie.c:342
bpf_map_update_value+0x4d3/0x540 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:203
generic_map_update_batch+0x60d/0x900 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:1849
bpf_map_do_batch+0x39a/0x660 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:5143
__sys_bpf+0x377/0x810
__do_sys_bpf kernel/bpf/syscall.c:5741 [inline]
__se_sys_bpf kernel/bpf/syscall.c:5739 [inline]
__x64_sys_bpf+0x7c/0x90 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:5739
do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/common.c:52 [inline]
do_syscall_64+0xf3/0x230 arch/x86/entry/common.c:83
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
other info that might help us debug this:
Possible unsafe locking scenario:
CPU0 CPU1
---- ----
lock(&trie->lock);
lock(&n->list_lock);
lock(&trie->lock);
lock(&n->list_lock);
*** DEADLOCK ***
2 locks held by syz.0.924/9009:
#0: ffffffff8e937ee0 (rcu_read_lock){....}-{1:2}, at: rcu_lock_acquire include/linux/rcupdate.h:337 [inline]
#0: ffffffff8e937ee0 (rcu_read_lock){....}-{1:2}, at: rcu_read_lock include/linux/rcupdate.h:849 [inline]
#0: ffffffff8e937ee0 (rcu_read_lock){....}-{1:2}, at: bpf_map_update_value+0x3c4/0x540 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:202
#1: ffff8880758dda00 (&trie->lock){-.-.}-{2:2}, at: trie_update_elem+0xc8/0xc00 kernel/bpf/lpm_trie.c:333
stack backtrace:
CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 9009 Comm: syz.0.924 Not tainted 6.11.0-syzkaller-10550-g99a648c951ba #0
Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 09/13/2024
Call Trace:
<TASK>
__dump_stack lib/dump_stack.c:94 [inline]
dump_stack_lvl+0x241/0x360 lib/dump_stack.c:120
print_circular_bug+0x13a/0x1b0 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:2074
check_noncircular+0x36a/0x4a0 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:2203
check_prev_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3158 [inline]
check_prevs_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3277 [inline]
validate_chain+0x18ef/0x5920 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3901
__lock_acquire+0x1384/0x2050 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5199
lock_acquire+0x1ed/0x550 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5822
__raw_spin_lock_irqsave include/linux/spinlock_api_smp.h:110 [inline]
_raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0xd5/0x120 kernel/locking/spinlock.c:162
__put_partials+0x61/0x130 mm/slub.c:3126
___slab_alloc+0x4f7/0x14b0 mm/slub.c:3776
__slab_alloc+0x58/0xa0 mm/slub.c:3909
__slab_alloc_node mm/slub.c:3962 [inline]
slab_alloc_node mm/slub.c:4123 [inline]
__do_kmalloc_node mm/slub.c:4264 [inline]
__kmalloc_node_noprof+0x286/0x440 mm/slub.c:4271
kmalloc_array_node_noprof include/linux/slab.h:995 [inline]
alloc_slab_obj_exts mm/slub.c:1969 [inline]
account_slab mm/slub.c:2542 [inline]
allocate_slab+0xb6/0x2f0 mm/slub.c:2597
new_slab mm/slub.c:2632 [inline]
___slab_alloc+0xcd1/0x14b0 mm/slub.c:3819
__slab_alloc+0x58/0xa0 mm/slub.c:3909
__slab_alloc_node mm/slub.c:3962 [inline]
slab_alloc_node mm/slub.c:4123 [inline]
__do_kmalloc_node mm/slub.c:4264 [inline]
__kmalloc_node_noprof+0x286/0x440 mm/slub.c:4271
kmalloc_node_noprof include/linux/slab.h:905 [inline]
bpf_map_kmalloc_node+0xd3/0x1c0 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:422
lpm_trie_node_alloc kernel/bpf/lpm_trie.c:299 [inline]
trie_update_elem+0x1cd/0xc00 kernel/bpf/lpm_trie.c:342
bpf_map_update_value+0x4d3/0x540 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:203
generic_map_update_batch+0x60d/0x900 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:1849
bpf_map_do_batch+0x39a/0x660 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:5143
__sys_bpf+0x377/0x810
__do_sys_bpf kernel/bpf/syscall.c:5741 [inline]
__se_sys_bpf kernel/bpf/syscall.c:5739 [inline]
__x64_sys_bpf+0x7c/0x90 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:5739
do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/common.c:52 [inline]
do_syscall_64+0xf3/0x230 arch/x86/entry/common.c:83
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
RIP: 0033:0x7fea6a97dff9
Code: ff ff c3 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 0f 1f 40 00 48 89 f8 48 89 f7 48 89 d6 48 89 ca 4d 89 c2 4d 89 c8 4c 8b 4c 24 08 0f 05 <48> 3d 01 f0 ff ff 73 01 c3 48 c7 c1 a8 ff ff ff f7 d8 64 89 01 48
RSP: 002b:00007fea6b756038 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000141
RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00007fea6ab35f80 RCX: 00007fea6a97dff9
RDX: 0000000000000038 RSI: 0000000020000480 RDI: 000000000000001a
RBP: 00007fea6a9f0296 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000
R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 0000000000000000
R13: 0000000000000000 R14: 00007fea6ab35f80 R15: 00007ffd21039768
</TASK>
---
This report is generated by a bot. It may contain errors.
See https://goo.gl/tpsmEJ for more information about syzbot.
syzbot engineers can be reached at syzkaller@googlegroups.com.
syzbot will keep track of this issue. See:
https://goo.gl/tpsmEJ#status for how to communicate with syzbot.
If the report is already addressed, let syzbot know by replying with:
#syz fix: exact-commit-title
If you want to overwrite report's subsystems, reply with:
#syz set subsystems: new-subsystem
(See the list of subsystem names on the web dashboard)
If the report is a duplicate of another one, reply with:
#syz dup: exact-subject-of-another-report
If you want to undo deduplication, reply with:
#syz undup
reply other threads:[~2024-10-04 11:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
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=66ffd428.050a0220.49194.048a.GAE@google.com \
--to=syzbot+5a878c984150fad34185@syzkaller.appspotmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=haoluo@google.com \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sdf@fomichev.me \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com \
--cc=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
/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.