From: Baokun Li <libaokun@linux.alibaba.com>
To: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, brauner@kernel.org, jack@suse.cz,
tj@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 1/3] writeback: fix race between cgroup_writeback_umount() and inode_switch_wbs()
Date: Sun, 17 May 2026 22:21:30 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260517142147.3354909-2-libaokun@linux.alibaba.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260517142147.3354909-1-libaokun@linux.alibaba.com>
When a container exits, the following BUG_ON() is occasionally triggered:
==================================================================
VFS: Busy inodes after unmount of sdb (ext4)
------------[ cut here ]------------
kernel BUG at fs/super.c:695!
CPU: 3 PID: 6 Comm: containerd-shim Tainted: G OE K 6.6 #1
pstate: 63400009 (nZCv daif +PAN -UAO +TCO +DIT -SSBS BTYPE=--)
pc : generic_shutdown_super+0xf0/0x100
lr : generic_shutdown_super+0xf0/0x100
Call trace:
generic_shutdown_super+0xf0/0x100
kill_block_super+0x20/0x48
ext4_kill_sb+0x28/0x60
deactivate_locked_super+0x54/0x130
deactivate_super+0x84/0xa0
cleanup_mnt+0xa4/0x140
__cleanup_mnt+0x18/0x28
task_work_run+0x78/0xe0
do_notify_resume+0x204/0x240
==================================================================
The root cause is a race between cgroup_writeback_umount() and
inode_switch_wbs()/cleanup_offline_cgwb(). There is a window between
inode_prepare_wbs_switch() returning true and the subsequent
wb_queue_isw() call. Following is the process that triggers the issue:
CPU A (umount) | CPU B (writeback)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
inode_switch_wbs/cleanup_offline_cgwb
atomic_inc(&isw_nr_in_flight)
inode_prepare_wbs_switch
-> passes SB_ACTIVE check
__iget(inode)
generic_shutdown_super
sb->s_flags &= ~SB_ACTIVE
cgroup_writeback_umount(sb)
smp_mb()
atomic_read(&isw_nr_in_flight)
rcu_barrier()
-> no pending RCU callbacks
flush_workqueue(isw_wq)
-> nothing queued, returns
evict_inodes(sb)
-> Inode skipped as isw still holds a ref.
sop->put_super(sb)
/* destroys percpu counters */
-> VFS: Busy inodes after unmount!
wb_queue_isw()
queue_work(isw_wq, ...)
/* later in work function */
inode_switch_wbs_work_fn
process_inode_switch_wbs
iput() -> evict
percpu_counter_dec() // UAF!
Fix this by extending the RCU read-side critical section in
inode_switch_wbs() and cleanup_offline_cgwb() to cover from
inode_prepare_wbs_switch() through wb_queue_isw(). Since there is
no sleep in this window, rcu_read_lock() can be used. Then add a
synchronize_rcu() in cgroup_writeback_umount() before the existing
rcu_barrier(), so that all in-flight switchers that have passed the
SB_ACTIVE check have completed queue_work() before flush_workqueue()
is called.
Fixes: a1a0e23e4903 ("writeback: flush inode cgroup wb switches instead of pinning super_block")
Suggested-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/mxnjq2l6guusfchvauxr3v7c4bwjasybxlleqbbh4efloeqspz@iqylk76ohufz
Signed-off-by: Baokun Li <libaokun@linux.alibaba.com>
---
fs/fs-writeback.c | 27 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/fs-writeback.c b/fs/fs-writeback.c
index a65694cbfe68..1f95ddcee363 100644
--- a/fs/fs-writeback.c
+++ b/fs/fs-writeback.c
@@ -665,7 +665,6 @@ static void inode_switch_wbs(struct inode *inode, int new_wb_id)
memcg_css = css_from_id(new_wb_id, &memory_cgrp_subsys);
if (memcg_css && !css_tryget(memcg_css))
memcg_css = NULL;
- rcu_read_unlock();
if (!memcg_css)
goto out_free;
@@ -680,10 +679,18 @@ static void inode_switch_wbs(struct inode *inode, int new_wb_id)
isw->inodes[0] = inode;
trace_inode_switch_wbs_queue(inode->i_wb, new_wb, 1);
+ /*
+ * Paired with synchronize_rcu() in cgroup_writeback_umount().
+ * Holding rcu_read_lock across wb_queue_isw() ensures
+ * synchronize_rcu() cannot return until the work is queued, so
+ * the subsequent flush_workqueue() will wait for the switch.
+ */
wb_queue_isw(new_wb, isw);
+ rcu_read_unlock();
return;
out_free:
+ rcu_read_unlock();
atomic_dec(&isw_nr_in_flight);
if (new_wb)
wb_put(new_wb);
@@ -741,6 +748,14 @@ bool cleanup_offline_cgwb(struct bdi_writeback *wb)
new_wb = &wb->bdi->wb; /* wb_get() is noop for bdi's wb */
nr = 0;
+ /*
+ * Paired with synchronize_rcu() in cgroup_writeback_umount().
+ * Holding rcu_read_lock across the SB_ACTIVE check, the inode grab
+ * and wb_queue_isw() ensures synchronize_rcu() cannot return until
+ * the work is queued, so the subsequent flush_workqueue() will wait
+ * for the switch.
+ */
+ rcu_read_lock();
spin_lock(&wb->list_lock);
/*
* In addition to the inodes that have completed writeback, also switch
@@ -758,6 +773,7 @@ bool cleanup_offline_cgwb(struct bdi_writeback *wb)
/* no attached inodes? bail out */
if (nr == 0) {
+ rcu_read_unlock();
atomic_dec(&isw_nr_in_flight);
wb_put(new_wb);
kfree(isw);
@@ -766,6 +782,7 @@ bool cleanup_offline_cgwb(struct bdi_writeback *wb)
trace_inode_switch_wbs_queue(wb, new_wb, nr);
wb_queue_isw(new_wb, isw);
+ rcu_read_unlock();
return restart;
}
@@ -1221,6 +1238,14 @@ void cgroup_writeback_umount(struct super_block *sb)
smp_mb();
if (atomic_read(&isw_nr_in_flight)) {
+ /*
+ * Paired with rcu_read_lock() in inode_switch_wbs() and
+ * cleanup_offline_cgwb(). synchronize_rcu() waits for any
+ * in-flight switcher that already passed the SB_ACTIVE check
+ * to finish queueing its work, so flush_workqueue() below
+ * will then drain it.
+ */
+ synchronize_rcu();
/*
* Use rcu_barrier() to wait for all pending callbacks to
* ensure that all in-flight wb switches are in the workqueue.
--
2.43.7
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-17 14:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-17 14:21 [PATCH v2 0/3] writeback: fix race between cgroup_writeback_umount() and inode_switch_wbs() Baokun Li
2026-05-17 14:21 ` Baokun Li [this message]
2026-05-18 12:58 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] " Jan Kara
2026-05-17 14:21 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] writeback: drop now-unnecessary rcu_barrier() in cgroup_writeback_umount() Baokun Li
2026-05-18 13:01 ` Jan Kara
2026-05-18 13:10 ` Baokun Li
2026-05-18 15:11 ` Jan Kara
2026-05-17 14:21 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] writeback: use a per-sb counter to drain inode wb switches at umount Baokun Li
2026-05-18 11:14 ` Baokun Li
2026-05-18 11:42 ` Christian Brauner
2026-05-18 11:52 ` Baokun Li
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=20260517142147.3354909-2-libaokun@linux.alibaba.com \
--to=libaokun@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tj@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox