All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: syzbot <syzbot+a5d8c609c02f508672cc@syzkaller.appspotmail.com>
To: hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp, linkinjeon@kernel.org,
	 linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	 sj1557.seo@samsung.com, syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com
Subject: [syzbot] [exfat?] possible deadlock in fat_count_free_clusters
Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2024 15:11:26 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <67313d9e.050a0220.138bd5.0054.GAE@google.com> (raw)

Hello,

syzbot found the following issue on:

HEAD commit:    929beafbe7ac Add linux-next specific files for 20241108
git tree:       linux-next
console output: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/log.txt?x=1621bd87980000
kernel config:  https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/.config?x=75175323f2078363
dashboard link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=a5d8c609c02f508672cc
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/9705ecb6a595/disk-929beafb.raw.xz
vmlinux: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/dbdd1f64b9b8/vmlinux-929beafb.xz
kernel image: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/3f70d07a929b/bzImage-929beafb.xz

IMPORTANT: if you fix the issue, please add the following tag to the commit:
Reported-by: syzbot+a5d8c609c02f508672cc@syzkaller.appspotmail.com

FAT-fs (loop3): error, invalid access to FAT (entry 0x0000616b)
======================================================
WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
6.12.0-rc6-next-20241108-syzkaller #0 Not tainted
------------------------------------------------------
syz.3.2125/17744 is trying to acquire lock:
ffff8880691980b0 (&sbi->fat_lock){+.+.}-{4:4}, at: lock_fat fs/fat/fatent.c:281 [inline]
ffff8880691980b0 (&sbi->fat_lock){+.+.}-{4:4}, at: fat_count_free_clusters+0x156/0xe70 fs/fat/fatent.c:724

but task is already holding lock:
ffff88802533deb0 (&q->limits_lock){+.+.}-{4:4}, at: queue_limits_start_update include/linux/blkdev.h:944 [inline]
ffff88802533deb0 (&q->limits_lock){+.+.}-{4:4}, at: loop_reconfigure_limits+0x287/0x9f0 drivers/block/loop.c:1003

which lock already depends on the new lock.


the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:

-> #2 (&q->limits_lock){+.+.}-{4:4}:
       lock_acquire+0x1ed/0x550 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5849
       __mutex_lock_common kernel/locking/mutex.c:585 [inline]
       __mutex_lock+0x1ac/0xee0 kernel/locking/mutex.c:735
       queue_limits_start_update include/linux/blkdev.h:944 [inline]
       loop_reconfigure_limits+0x287/0x9f0 drivers/block/loop.c:1003
       loop_set_block_size drivers/block/loop.c:1473 [inline]
       lo_simple_ioctl drivers/block/loop.c:1496 [inline]
       lo_ioctl+0x1351/0x1f50 drivers/block/loop.c:1559
       blkdev_ioctl+0x57d/0x6a0 block/ioctl.c:693
       vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline]
       __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:906 [inline]
       __se_sys_ioctl+0xf5/0x170 fs/ioctl.c:892
       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

-> #1 (&q->q_usage_counter(io)#17){++++}-{0:0}:
       lock_acquire+0x1ed/0x550 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5849
       bio_queue_enter block/blk.h:75 [inline]
       blk_mq_submit_bio+0x1510/0x2490 block/blk-mq.c:3095
       __submit_bio+0x2c2/0x560 block/blk-core.c:629
       __submit_bio_noacct_mq block/blk-core.c:710 [inline]
       submit_bio_noacct_nocheck+0x4d3/0xe30 block/blk-core.c:739
       submit_bh fs/buffer.c:2819 [inline]
       __bread_slow fs/buffer.c:1264 [inline]
       __bread_gfp+0x23c/0x400 fs/buffer.c:1488
       sb_bread include/linux/buffer_head.h:346 [inline]
       fat12_ent_bread+0x155/0x540 fs/fat/fatent.c:77
       fat_ent_read_block+0x3e4/0x530 fs/fat/fatent.c:445
       fat_alloc_clusters+0x4ee/0x11c0 fs/fat/fatent.c:493
       fat_add_cluster fs/fat/inode.c:107 [inline]
       __fat_get_block fs/fat/inode.c:154 [inline]
       fat_get_block+0x4c4/0xd00 fs/fat/inode.c:189
       __block_write_begin_int+0x50c/0x1a70 fs/buffer.c:2116
       block_write_begin fs/buffer.c:2226 [inline]
       cont_write_begin+0x6e2/0x9d0 fs/buffer.c:2577
       fat_write_begin+0x76/0x140 fs/fat/inode.c:228
       generic_perform_write+0x344/0x6d0 mm/filemap.c:4055
       generic_file_write_iter+0xae/0x310 mm/filemap.c:4182
       new_sync_write fs/read_write.c:586 [inline]
       vfs_write+0xaeb/0xd30 fs/read_write.c:679
       ksys_write+0x18f/0x2b0 fs/read_write.c:731
       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 (&sbi->fat_lock){+.+.}-{4:4}:
       check_prev_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3161 [inline]
       check_prevs_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3280 [inline]
       validate_chain+0x18ef/0x5920 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3904
       __lock_acquire+0x1397/0x2100 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5226
       lock_acquire+0x1ed/0x550 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5849
       __mutex_lock_common kernel/locking/mutex.c:585 [inline]
       __mutex_lock+0x1ac/0xee0 kernel/locking/mutex.c:735
       lock_fat fs/fat/fatent.c:281 [inline]
       fat_count_free_clusters+0x156/0xe70 fs/fat/fatent.c:724
       fat_statfs+0x139/0x450 fs/fat/inode.c:834
       statfs_by_dentry fs/statfs.c:66 [inline]
       vfs_statfs+0x13b/0x2c0 fs/statfs.c:90
       loop_config_discard drivers/block/loop.c:798 [inline]
       loop_reconfigure_limits+0x5fe/0x9f0 drivers/block/loop.c:1012
       loop_configure+0x77e/0xeb0 drivers/block/loop.c:1093
       lo_ioctl+0x846/0x1f50
       blkdev_ioctl+0x57d/0x6a0 block/ioctl.c:693
       vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline]
       __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:906 [inline]
       __se_sys_ioctl+0xf5/0x170 fs/ioctl.c:892
       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:

Chain exists of:
  &sbi->fat_lock --> &q->q_usage_counter(io)#17 --> &q->limits_lock

 Possible unsafe locking scenario:

       CPU0                    CPU1
       ----                    ----
  lock(&q->limits_lock);
                               lock(&q->q_usage_counter(io)#17);
                               lock(&q->limits_lock);
  lock(&sbi->fat_lock);

 *** DEADLOCK ***

2 locks held by syz.3.2125/17744:
 #0: ffff88802541fb60 (&lo->lo_mutex){+.+.}-{4:4}, at: loop_global_lock_killable drivers/block/loop.c:120 [inline]
 #0: ffff88802541fb60 (&lo->lo_mutex){+.+.}-{4:4}, at: loop_configure+0x1f7/0xeb0 drivers/block/loop.c:1044
 #1: ffff88802533deb0 (&q->limits_lock){+.+.}-{4:4}, at: queue_limits_start_update include/linux/blkdev.h:944 [inline]
 #1: ffff88802533deb0 (&q->limits_lock){+.+.}-{4:4}, at: loop_reconfigure_limits+0x287/0x9f0 drivers/block/loop.c:1003

stack backtrace:
CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 17744 Comm: syz.3.2125 Not tainted 6.12.0-rc6-next-20241108-syzkaller #0
Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 10/30/2024
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:2206
 check_prev_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3161 [inline]
 check_prevs_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3280 [inline]
 validate_chain+0x18ef/0x5920 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3904
 __lock_acquire+0x1397/0x2100 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5226
 lock_acquire+0x1ed/0x550 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5849
 __mutex_lock_common kernel/locking/mutex.c:585 [inline]
 __mutex_lock+0x1ac/0xee0 kernel/locking/mutex.c:735
 lock_fat fs/fat/fatent.c:281 [inline]
 fat_count_free_clusters+0x156/0xe70 fs/fat/fatent.c:724
 fat_statfs+0x139/0x450 fs/fat/inode.c:834
 statfs_by_dentry fs/statfs.c:66 [inline]
 vfs_statfs+0x13b/0x2c0 fs/statfs.c:90
 loop_config_discard drivers/block/loop.c:798 [inline]
 loop_reconfigure_limits+0x5fe/0x9f0 drivers/block/loop.c:1012
 loop_configure+0x77e/0xeb0 drivers/block/loop.c:1093
 lo_ioctl+0x846/0x1f50
 blkdev_ioctl+0x57d/0x6a0 block/ioctl.c:693
 vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline]
 __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:906 [inline]
 __se_sys_ioctl+0xf5/0x170 fs/ioctl.c:892
 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: 0033:0x7f9752d7e719
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:00007f9753abd038 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000010
RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00007f9752f36058 RCX: 00007f9752d7e719
RDX: 00000000200002c0 RSI: 0000000000004c0a RDI: 0000000000000008
RBP: 00007f9752df139e R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000
R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 0000000000000000
R13: 0000000000000000 R14: 00007f9752f36058 R15: 00007ffe36e679e8
 </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:[~2024-11-10 23:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-11-10 23:11 syzbot [this message]
2024-11-11 13:07 ` [syzbot] [exfat?] possible deadlock in fat_count_free_clusters OGAWA Hirofumi
2024-11-19  7:27   ` [PATCH] loop: Fix ABBA locking race (Re: [syzbot] [exfat?] possible deadlock in fat_count_free_clusters) OGAWA Hirofumi
2024-11-19 12:10   ` [syzbot] [exfat?] possible deadlock in fat_count_free_clusters Ming Lei
2024-11-19 14:18     ` Jens Axboe
2024-11-19 14:46       ` OGAWA Hirofumi
2024-11-19 14:55         ` Jens Axboe
2024-11-19 15:12           ` OGAWA Hirofumi

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=67313d9e.050a0220.138bd5.0054.GAE@google.com \
    --to=syzbot+a5d8c609c02f508672cc@syzkaller.appspotmail.com \
    --cc=hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp \
    --cc=linkinjeon@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sj1557.seo@samsung.com \
    --cc=syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.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.