* [PATCH AUTOSEL 5.10 08/16] btrfs: update the bdev time directly when closing
[not found] <20210913223442.435885-1-sashal@kernel.org>
@ 2021-09-13 22:34 ` Sasha Levin
2021-09-13 22:34 ` [PATCH AUTOSEL 5.10 09/16] btrfs: fix lockdep warning while mounting sprout fs Sasha Levin
1 sibling, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Sasha Levin @ 2021-09-13 22:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel, stable
Cc: Josef Bacik, Anand Jain, David Sterba, Sasha Levin, linux-btrfs
From: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
[ Upstream commit 8f96a5bfa1503e0a5f3c78d51e993a1794d4aff1 ]
We update the ctime/mtime of a block device when we remove it so that
blkid knows the device changed. However we do this by re-opening the
block device and calling filp_update_time. This is more correct because
it'll call the inode->i_op->update_time if it exists, but the block dev
inodes do not do this. Instead call generic_update_time() on the
bd_inode in order to avoid the blkdev_open path and get rid of the
following lockdep splat:
======================================================
WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
5.14.0-rc2+ #406 Not tainted
------------------------------------------------------
losetup/11596 is trying to acquire lock:
ffff939640d2f538 ((wq_completion)loop0){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: flush_workqueue+0x67/0x5e0
but task is already holding lock:
ffff939655510c68 (&lo->lo_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: __loop_clr_fd+0x41/0x660 [loop]
which lock already depends on the new lock.
the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
-> #4 (&lo->lo_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}:
__mutex_lock+0x7d/0x750
lo_open+0x28/0x60 [loop]
blkdev_get_whole+0x25/0xf0
blkdev_get_by_dev.part.0+0x168/0x3c0
blkdev_open+0xd2/0xe0
do_dentry_open+0x161/0x390
path_openat+0x3cc/0xa20
do_filp_open+0x96/0x120
do_sys_openat2+0x7b/0x130
__x64_sys_openat+0x46/0x70
do_syscall_64+0x38/0x90
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae
-> #3 (&disk->open_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}:
__mutex_lock+0x7d/0x750
blkdev_get_by_dev.part.0+0x56/0x3c0
blkdev_open+0xd2/0xe0
do_dentry_open+0x161/0x390
path_openat+0x3cc/0xa20
do_filp_open+0x96/0x120
file_open_name+0xc7/0x170
filp_open+0x2c/0x50
btrfs_scratch_superblocks.part.0+0x10f/0x170
btrfs_rm_device.cold+0xe8/0xed
btrfs_ioctl+0x2a31/0x2e70
__x64_sys_ioctl+0x80/0xb0
do_syscall_64+0x38/0x90
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae
-> #2 (sb_writers#12){.+.+}-{0:0}:
lo_write_bvec+0xc2/0x240 [loop]
loop_process_work+0x238/0xd00 [loop]
process_one_work+0x26b/0x560
worker_thread+0x55/0x3c0
kthread+0x140/0x160
ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30
-> #1 ((work_completion)(&lo->rootcg_work)){+.+.}-{0:0}:
process_one_work+0x245/0x560
worker_thread+0x55/0x3c0
kthread+0x140/0x160
ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30
-> #0 ((wq_completion)loop0){+.+.}-{0:0}:
__lock_acquire+0x10ea/0x1d90
lock_acquire+0xb5/0x2b0
flush_workqueue+0x91/0x5e0
drain_workqueue+0xa0/0x110
destroy_workqueue+0x36/0x250
__loop_clr_fd+0x9a/0x660 [loop]
block_ioctl+0x3f/0x50
__x64_sys_ioctl+0x80/0xb0
do_syscall_64+0x38/0x90
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae
other info that might help us debug this:
Chain exists of:
(wq_completion)loop0 --> &disk->open_mutex --> &lo->lo_mutex
Possible unsafe locking scenario:
CPU0 CPU1
---- ----
lock(&lo->lo_mutex);
lock(&disk->open_mutex);
lock(&lo->lo_mutex);
lock((wq_completion)loop0);
*** DEADLOCK ***
1 lock held by losetup/11596:
#0: ffff939655510c68 (&lo->lo_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: __loop_clr_fd+0x41/0x660 [loop]
stack backtrace:
CPU: 1 PID: 11596 Comm: losetup Not tainted 5.14.0-rc2+ #406
Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 1.13.0-2.fc32 04/01/2014
Call Trace:
dump_stack_lvl+0x57/0x72
check_noncircular+0xcf/0xf0
? stack_trace_save+0x3b/0x50
__lock_acquire+0x10ea/0x1d90
lock_acquire+0xb5/0x2b0
? flush_workqueue+0x67/0x5e0
? lockdep_init_map_type+0x47/0x220
flush_workqueue+0x91/0x5e0
? flush_workqueue+0x67/0x5e0
? verify_cpu+0xf0/0x100
drain_workqueue+0xa0/0x110
destroy_workqueue+0x36/0x250
__loop_clr_fd+0x9a/0x660 [loop]
? blkdev_ioctl+0x8d/0x2a0
block_ioctl+0x3f/0x50
__x64_sys_ioctl+0x80/0xb0
do_syscall_64+0x38/0x90
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae
Reviewed-by: Anand Jain <anand.jain@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
Reviewed-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
---
fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 18 ++++++++++--------
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
index d1fccddcf403..003960c484a1 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
@@ -1852,15 +1852,17 @@ static int btrfs_add_dev_item(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
* Function to update ctime/mtime for a given device path.
* Mainly used for ctime/mtime based probe like libblkid.
*/
-static void update_dev_time(const char *path_name)
+static void update_dev_time(struct block_device *bdev)
{
- struct file *filp;
+ struct inode *inode = bdev->bd_inode;
+ struct timespec64 now;
- filp = filp_open(path_name, O_RDWR, 0);
- if (IS_ERR(filp))
+ /* Shouldn't happen but just in case. */
+ if (!inode)
return;
- file_update_time(filp);
- filp_close(filp, NULL);
+
+ now = current_time(inode);
+ generic_update_time(inode, &now, S_MTIME | S_CTIME);
}
static int btrfs_rm_dev_item(struct btrfs_device *device)
@@ -2035,7 +2037,7 @@ void btrfs_scratch_superblocks(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info,
btrfs_kobject_uevent(bdev, KOBJ_CHANGE);
/* Update ctime/mtime for device path for libblkid */
- update_dev_time(device_path);
+ update_dev_time(bdev);
}
int btrfs_rm_device(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info, const char *device_path,
@@ -2678,7 +2680,7 @@ int btrfs_init_new_device(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info, const char *device_path
btrfs_forget_devices(device_path);
/* Update ctime/mtime for blkid or udev */
- update_dev_time(device_path);
+ update_dev_time(bdev);
return ret;
--
2.30.2
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread* [PATCH AUTOSEL 5.10 09/16] btrfs: fix lockdep warning while mounting sprout fs
[not found] <20210913223442.435885-1-sashal@kernel.org>
2021-09-13 22:34 ` [PATCH AUTOSEL 5.10 08/16] btrfs: update the bdev time directly when closing Sasha Levin
@ 2021-09-13 22:34 ` Sasha Levin
1 sibling, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Sasha Levin @ 2021-09-13 22:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel, stable
Cc: Anand Jain, Su Yue, David Sterba, Sasha Levin, linux-btrfs
From: Anand Jain <anand.jain@oracle.com>
[ Upstream commit c124706900c20dee70f921bb3a90492431561a0a ]
Following test case reproduces lockdep warning.
Test case:
$ mkfs.btrfs -f <dev1>
$ btrfstune -S 1 <dev1>
$ mount <dev1> <mnt>
$ btrfs device add <dev2> <mnt> -f
$ umount <mnt>
$ mount <dev2> <mnt>
$ umount <mnt>
The warning claims a possible ABBA deadlock between the threads
initiated by [#1] btrfs device add and [#0] the mount.
[ 540.743122] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
[ 540.743129] 5.11.0-rc7+ #5 Not tainted
[ 540.743135] ------------------------------------------------------
[ 540.743142] mount/2515 is trying to acquire lock:
[ 540.743149] ffffa0c5544c2ce0 (&fs_devs->device_list_mutex){+.+.}-{4:4}, at: clone_fs_devices+0x6d/0x210 [btrfs]
[ 540.743458] but task is already holding lock:
[ 540.743461] ffffa0c54a7932b8 (btrfs-chunk-00){++++}-{4:4}, at: __btrfs_tree_read_lock+0x32/0x200 [btrfs]
[ 540.743541] which lock already depends on the new lock.
[ 540.743543] the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
[ 540.743546] -> #1 (btrfs-chunk-00){++++}-{4:4}:
[ 540.743566] down_read_nested+0x48/0x2b0
[ 540.743585] __btrfs_tree_read_lock+0x32/0x200 [btrfs]
[ 540.743650] btrfs_read_lock_root_node+0x70/0x200 [btrfs]
[ 540.743733] btrfs_search_slot+0x6c6/0xe00 [btrfs]
[ 540.743785] btrfs_update_device+0x83/0x260 [btrfs]
[ 540.743849] btrfs_finish_chunk_alloc+0x13f/0x660 [btrfs] <--- device_list_mutex
[ 540.743911] btrfs_create_pending_block_groups+0x18d/0x3f0 [btrfs]
[ 540.743982] btrfs_commit_transaction+0x86/0x1260 [btrfs]
[ 540.744037] btrfs_init_new_device+0x1600/0x1dd0 [btrfs]
[ 540.744101] btrfs_ioctl+0x1c77/0x24c0 [btrfs]
[ 540.744166] __x64_sys_ioctl+0xe4/0x140
[ 540.744170] do_syscall_64+0x4b/0x80
[ 540.744174] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
[ 540.744180] -> #0 (&fs_devs->device_list_mutex){+.+.}-{4:4}:
[ 540.744184] __lock_acquire+0x155f/0x2360
[ 540.744188] lock_acquire+0x10b/0x5c0
[ 540.744190] __mutex_lock+0xb1/0xf80
[ 540.744193] mutex_lock_nested+0x27/0x30
[ 540.744196] clone_fs_devices+0x6d/0x210 [btrfs]
[ 540.744270] btrfs_read_chunk_tree+0x3c7/0xbb0 [btrfs]
[ 540.744336] open_ctree+0xf6e/0x2074 [btrfs]
[ 540.744406] btrfs_mount_root.cold.72+0x16/0x127 [btrfs]
[ 540.744472] legacy_get_tree+0x38/0x90
[ 540.744475] vfs_get_tree+0x30/0x140
[ 540.744478] fc_mount+0x16/0x60
[ 540.744482] vfs_kern_mount+0x91/0x100
[ 540.744484] btrfs_mount+0x1e6/0x670 [btrfs]
[ 540.744536] legacy_get_tree+0x38/0x90
[ 540.744537] vfs_get_tree+0x30/0x140
[ 540.744539] path_mount+0x8d8/0x1070
[ 540.744541] do_mount+0x8d/0xc0
[ 540.744543] __x64_sys_mount+0x125/0x160
[ 540.744545] do_syscall_64+0x4b/0x80
[ 540.744547] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
[ 540.744551] other info that might help us debug this:
[ 540.744552] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
[ 540.744553] CPU0 CPU1
[ 540.744554] ---- ----
[ 540.744555] lock(btrfs-chunk-00);
[ 540.744557] lock(&fs_devs->device_list_mutex);
[ 540.744560] lock(btrfs-chunk-00);
[ 540.744562] lock(&fs_devs->device_list_mutex);
[ 540.744564]
*** DEADLOCK ***
[ 540.744565] 3 locks held by mount/2515:
[ 540.744567] #0: ffffa0c56bf7a0e0 (&type->s_umount_key#42/1){+.+.}-{4:4}, at: alloc_super.isra.16+0xdf/0x450
[ 540.744574] #1: ffffffffc05a9628 (uuid_mutex){+.+.}-{4:4}, at: btrfs_read_chunk_tree+0x63/0xbb0 [btrfs]
[ 540.744640] #2: ffffa0c54a7932b8 (btrfs-chunk-00){++++}-{4:4}, at: __btrfs_tree_read_lock+0x32/0x200 [btrfs]
[ 540.744708]
stack backtrace:
[ 540.744712] CPU: 2 PID: 2515 Comm: mount Not tainted 5.11.0-rc7+ #5
But the device_list_mutex in clone_fs_devices() is redundant, as
explained below. Two threads [1] and [2] (below) could lead to
clone_fs_device().
[1]
open_ctree <== mount sprout fs
btrfs_read_chunk_tree()
mutex_lock(&uuid_mutex) <== global lock
read_one_dev()
open_seed_devices()
clone_fs_devices() <== seed fs_devices
mutex_lock(&orig->device_list_mutex) <== seed fs_devices
[2]
btrfs_init_new_device() <== sprouting
mutex_lock(&uuid_mutex); <== global lock
btrfs_prepare_sprout()
lockdep_assert_held(&uuid_mutex)
clone_fs_devices(seed_fs_device) <== seed fs_devices
Both of these threads hold uuid_mutex which is sufficient to protect
getting the seed device(s) freed while we are trying to clone it for
sprouting [2] or mounting a sprout [1] (as above). A mounted seed device
can not free/write/replace because it is read-only. An unmounted seed
device can be freed by btrfs_free_stale_devices(), but it needs
uuid_mutex. So this patch removes the unnecessary device_list_mutex in
clone_fs_devices(). And adds a lockdep_assert_held(&uuid_mutex) in
clone_fs_devices().
Reported-by: Su Yue <l@damenly.su>
Tested-by: Su Yue <l@damenly.su>
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain <anand.jain@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
---
fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 7 ++++---
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
index 003960c484a1..a01cec6ae5ff 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
@@ -568,6 +568,8 @@ static int btrfs_free_stale_devices(const char *path,
struct btrfs_device *device, *tmp_device;
int ret = 0;
+ lockdep_assert_held(&uuid_mutex);
+
if (path)
ret = -ENOENT;
@@ -999,11 +1001,12 @@ static struct btrfs_fs_devices *clone_fs_devices(struct btrfs_fs_devices *orig)
struct btrfs_device *orig_dev;
int ret = 0;
+ lockdep_assert_held(&uuid_mutex);
+
fs_devices = alloc_fs_devices(orig->fsid, NULL);
if (IS_ERR(fs_devices))
return fs_devices;
- mutex_lock(&orig->device_list_mutex);
fs_devices->total_devices = orig->total_devices;
list_for_each_entry(orig_dev, &orig->devices, dev_list) {
@@ -1035,10 +1038,8 @@ static struct btrfs_fs_devices *clone_fs_devices(struct btrfs_fs_devices *orig)
device->fs_devices = fs_devices;
fs_devices->num_devices++;
}
- mutex_unlock(&orig->device_list_mutex);
return fs_devices;
error:
- mutex_unlock(&orig->device_list_mutex);
free_fs_devices(fs_devices);
return ERR_PTR(ret);
}
--
2.30.2
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread