From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
To: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de>,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@kernel.org>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-next@vger.kernel.org,
lkp@intel.com, oe-lkp@lists.linux.dev,
Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
Oliver Sang <oliver.sang@intel.com>,
linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] loop: Fix NULL pointer dereference in lo_rw_aio()
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2026 10:44:19 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d2f387b9-031a-4306-9323-56f98a8241b7@acm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3bb080d0-4421-4012-8a62-6a2bf165cbd9@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
On 8/26/26 3:37 AM, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> Current situation is a result of what we had considered 4 years ago; we don't need
> to destroy workqueue (note that destroy_workqueue() implies drain_workqueue()) from
> __loop_clr_fd() ( https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220330052917.2566582-16-hch@lst.de ).
>
> Since there is a
>
> Chain exists of:
> (wq_completion)loop0 --> system_transition_mutex/1 --> &disk->open_mutex
>
> Possible unsafe locking scenario:
>
> CPU0 CPU1
> ---- ----
> lock(&disk->open_mutex);
> lock(system_transition_mutex/1);
> lock(&disk->open_mutex);
> lock((wq_completion)loop0);
This ABBA locking scenario can only be triggered if a loop device is
bound to a sysfs attribute with read or write methods that lock
system_transition_mutex, e.g. /sys/kernel/power, isn't it?
> dependency, but my proposal to forbid binding loop device to pseudo files
> ( https://lkml.kernel.org/r/148efba2-a0b6-47d7-ac76-b19d2f4b696c@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp )
> was rejected by Christoph, we are stuck in a
>
> Draining workqueue with open_mutex held causes creating a complex lock dependency
> chain involving the global system_transition_mutex. (Maybe there are other paths
> that create similar dependency chain if we drain workqueue with open_mutex held.)
>
> versus
>
> Not draining workqueue causes NULL pointer dereference in lo_rw_aio().
>
> collision. Therefore,
>
> Draining workqueue *without open_mutex held* can avoid creating a complex lock
> dependency chain involving the global system_transition_mutex and can also avoid
> NULL pointer dereference in lo_rw_aio().
>
> is my solution.
Releasing and reacquiring disk->open_mutex from __loop_clr_fd() seems
risky to me. There is plenty of code in block/bdev.c that assumes that
disk->open_mutex is not released by lo_release().
I think there is another solution: instead of draining the workqueue
from inside __loop_clr_fd(), postpone it until the next time the loop
device is bound. See also the patch below.
Regarding your earlier request for a Sashiko review: I will look into
configuring Sashiko such that I can run "sashiko review ${commit_id}"
locally. The only part I'm missing right now is a Sashiko API key.
Thanks,
Bart.
loop: Serialize I/O and queue limits updates
diff --git a/drivers/block/loop.c b/drivers/block/loop.c
index 119758b45e47..1406932fae93 100644
--- a/drivers/block/loop.c
+++ b/drivers/block/loop.c
@@ -1086,6 +1086,12 @@ static int loop_configure(struct loop_device *lo,
blk_mode_t mode,
error = -ENOMEM;
goto out_unlock;
}
+ } else {
+ /*
+ * Wait until all work related to a previously bound file has
+ * finished.
+ */
+ flush_workqueue(lo->workqueue);
}
/* suppress uevents while reconfiguring the device */
@@ -1154,11 +1160,27 @@ static int loop_configure(struct loop_device
*lo, blk_mode_t mode,
static void __loop_clr_fd(struct gendisk *disk, struct loop_device *lo)
__must_hold(&disk->open_mutex)
{
+ struct request_queue *q = lo->lo_queue;
struct queue_limits lim;
+ unsigned int memflags;
struct file *filp;
gfp_t gfp = lo->old_gfp_mask;
int err;
+ /*
+ * Prevent that new asynchronous I/O is submitted while queue limits
+ * are being modified.
+ */
+ blk_queue_flag_set(QUEUE_FLAG_DYING, q);
+
+ /* Wait until asynchronous I/O has finished. */
+ memflags = blk_mq_freeze_queue(q);
+ blk_mq_unfreeze_queue(q, memflags);
+
+ /* Wait until I/O dispatching has finished. */
+ blk_mq_quiesce_queue(q);
+ blk_mq_unquiesce_queue(q);
+
mutex_lock(&lo->lo_mutex);
filp = lo->lo_backing_file;
lo->lo_backing_file = NULL;
@@ -1169,17 +1191,12 @@ static void __loop_clr_fd(struct gendisk *disk,
struct loop_device *lo)
lo->lo_sizelimit = 0;
memset(lo->lo_file_name, 0, LO_NAME_SIZE);
- /*
- * Reset the block size to the default.
- *
- * No queue freezing needed because this is called from the final
- * ->release call only, so there can't be any outstanding I/O.
- */
- lim = queue_limits_start_update(lo->lo_queue);
+ /* Reset the block size to the default. */
+ lim = queue_limits_start_update(q);
lim.logical_block_size = SECTOR_SIZE;
lim.physical_block_size = SECTOR_SIZE;
lim.io_min = SECTOR_SIZE;
- queue_limits_commit_update(lo->lo_queue, &lim);
+ queue_limits_commit_update(q, &lim);
invalidate_disk(disk);
loop_sysfs_exit(lo);
@@ -1217,6 +1234,9 @@ static void __loop_clr_fd(struct gendisk *disk,
struct loop_device *lo)
WRITE_ONCE(lo->lo_state, Lo_unbound);
mutex_unlock(&lo->lo_mutex);
+ /* Reallow I/O. */
+ blk_queue_flag_clear(QUEUE_FLAG_DYING, q);
+
fput(filp);
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-26 17:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 66+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-04-18 0:02 [syzbot] [block?] general protection fault in lo_rw_aio syzbot
2026-04-21 11:05 ` Tetsuo Handa
2026-05-11 11:43 ` [PATCH] loop: Fix NULL pointer dereference by synchronizing lo_release and loop_queue_rq Tetsuo Handa
2026-05-11 15:58 ` Bart Van Assche
2026-05-11 17:43 ` Tetsuo Handa
2026-05-12 11:46 ` Tetsuo Handa
2026-05-15 1:38 ` [PATCH v2] " Tetsuo Handa
2026-05-19 0:40 ` Andrew Morton
2026-05-19 9:27 ` Tetsuo Handa
2026-05-20 3:06 ` Ming Lei
2026-05-20 6:36 ` Tetsuo Handa
2026-05-20 7:49 ` Ming Lei
2026-05-20 8:20 ` Tetsuo Handa
2026-05-20 8:54 ` Ming Lei
2026-05-25 3:40 ` [PATCH v3] loop: Fix NULL pointer dereference in lo_rw_aio() Tetsuo Handa
2026-05-25 15:19 ` Ming Lei
2026-05-26 0:25 ` Tetsuo Handa
2026-05-27 1:20 ` Ming Lei
2026-05-27 1:35 ` Tetsuo Handa
2026-05-27 3:00 ` Ming Lei
2026-05-27 11:29 ` Tetsuo Handa
2026-05-27 18:11 ` Damien Le Moal
2026-05-28 8:38 ` Christoph Hellwig
2026-05-28 10:16 ` Qu Wenruo
2026-06-01 14:40 ` Christoph Hellwig
2026-06-01 16:29 ` Brian Foster
2026-06-01 22:27 ` Qu Wenruo
2026-06-01 15:29 ` Ming Lei
2026-06-01 21:51 ` Hillf Danton
2026-06-01 22:14 ` Ming Lei
2026-06-01 23:17 ` Hillf Danton
2026-06-01 23:36 ` Ming Lei
2026-06-02 2:02 ` Hillf Danton
2026-05-28 5:43 ` Hillf Danton
2026-05-28 23:00 ` Hillf Danton
2026-05-29 0:14 ` Tetsuo Handa
2026-05-29 7:04 ` Hillf Danton
2026-05-29 22:05 ` Hillf Danton
2026-05-30 23:57 ` Tetsuo Handa
2026-06-07 10:54 ` [PATCH v4] " Tetsuo Handa
2026-06-09 17:50 ` Al Viro
2026-06-13 11:00 ` Tetsuo Handa
2026-06-19 14:33 ` Tetsuo Handa
2026-06-20 7:39 ` Al Viro
2026-06-20 9:42 ` Tetsuo Handa
2026-07-13 3:04 ` Hillf Danton
2026-07-13 11:02 ` Tetsuo Handa
2026-07-14 4:38 ` Hillf Danton
2026-07-16 0:05 ` [PATCH v5] " Tetsuo Handa
2026-08-23 11:17 ` [PATCH v6] " Tetsuo Handa
2026-08-23 15:57 ` Markus Elfring
2026-08-24 22:06 ` Tetsuo Handa
2026-08-24 22:53 ` Bart Van Assche
2026-08-24 23:24 ` Bart Van Assche
2026-08-25 15:13 ` Tetsuo Handa
2026-08-25 22:18 ` Bart Van Assche
2026-08-25 23:28 ` Tetsuo Handa
2026-08-25 23:16 ` Bart Van Assche
2026-08-26 10:37 ` Tetsuo Handa
2026-08-26 17:44 ` Bart Van Assche [this message]
2026-08-27 15:30 ` Tetsuo Handa
2026-08-27 17:28 ` Bart Van Assche
2026-08-28 15:53 ` [PATCH v7] " Tetsuo Handa
2026-08-28 16:29 ` Bart Van Assche
2026-07-15 16:01 ` [syzbot] [block?] general protection fault in lo_rw_aio Bart Van Assche
2026-07-15 16:02 ` syzbot
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=d2f387b9-031a-4306-9323-56f98a8241b7@acm.org \
--to=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=Markus.Elfring@web.de \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=dlemoal@kernel.org \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=hdanton@sina.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkp@intel.com \
--cc=oe-lkp@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=oliver.sang@intel.com \
--cc=penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox