[ 031/108] cfg80211: fix possible circular lock on reg_regdb_search()

Ben Hutchings
2012-10-07T23:25:58Z

From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@do-not-panic.com>

commit a85d0d7f3460b1a123b78e7f7e39bf72c37dfb78 upstream.

When call_crda() is called we kick off a witch hunt search
for the same regulatory domain on our internal regulatory
database and that work gets kicked off on a workqueue, this
is done while the cfg80211_mutex is held. If that workqueue
kicks off it will first lock reg_regdb_search_mutex and
later cfg80211_mutex but to ensure two CPUs will not contend
against cfg80211_mutex the right thing to do is to have the
reg_regdb_search() wait until the cfg80211_mutex is let go.

The lockdep report is pasted below.

cfg80211: Calling CRDA to update world regulatory domain

======================================================
[ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
3.3.8 #3 Tainted: G O
-------------------------------------------------------
kworker/0:1/235 is trying to acquire lock:
(cfg80211_mutex){+.+...}, at: [<816468a4>] set_regdom+0x78c/0x808 [cfg80211]

but task is already holding lock:
(reg_regdb_search_mutex){+.+...}, at: [<81646828>] set_regdom+0x710/0x808 [cfg80211]

which lock already depends on the new lock.

the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:

-> #2 (reg_regdb_search_mutex){+.+...}:
[<800a8384>] lock_acquire+0x60/0x88
[<802950a8>] mutex_lock_nested+0x54/0x31c
[<81645778>] is_world_regdom+0x9f8/0xc74 [cfg80211]

-> #1 (reg_mutex#2){+.+...}:
[<800a8384>] lock_acquire+0x60/0x88
[<802950a8>] mutex_lock_nested+0x54/0x31c
[<8164539c>] is_world_regdom+0x61c/0xc74 [cfg80211]

-> #0 (cfg80211_mutex){+.+...}:
[<800a77b8>] __lock_acquire+0x10d4/0x17bc
[<800a8384>] lock_acquire+0x60/0x88
[<802950a8>] mutex_lock_nested+0x54/0x31c
[<816468a4>] set_regdom+0x78c/0x808 [cfg80211]

other info that might help us debug this:

Chain exists of:
cfg80211_mutex --> reg_mutex#2 --> reg_regdb_search_mutex

Possible unsafe locking scenario:

CPU0 CPU1
---- ----
lock(reg_regdb_search_mutex);
lock(reg_mutex#2);
lock(reg_regdb_search_mutex);
lock(cfg80211_mutex);

*** DEADLOCK ***

3 locks held by kworker/0:1/235:
#0: (events){.+.+..}, at: [<80089a00>] process_one_work+0x230/0x460
#1: (reg_regdb_work){+.+...}, at: [<80089a00>] process_one_work+0x230/0x460
#2: (reg_regdb_search_mutex){+.+...}, at: [<81646828>] set_regdom+0x710/0x808 [cfg80211]

stack backtrace:
Call Trace:
[<80290fd4>] dump_stack+0x8/0x34
[<80291bc4>] print_circular_bug+0x2ac/0x2d8
[<800a77b8>] __lock_acquire+0x10d4/0x17bc
[<800a8384>] lock_acquire+0x60/0x88
[<802950a8>] mutex_lock_nested+0x54/0x31c
[<816468a4>] set_regdom+0x78c/0x808 [cfg80211]

Reported-by: Felix Fietkau <nbd@openwrt.org>
Tested-by: Felix Fietkau <nbd@openwrt.org>
Signed-off-by: Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@do-not-panic.com>
Reviewed-by: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Signed-off-by: John W. Linville <linville@tuxdriver.com>
Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>
---
net/wireless/reg.c | 12 +++++++++---
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/wireless/reg.c b/net/wireless/reg.c
index 2ded3c7..72d170c 100644
--- a/net/wireless/reg.c
+++ b/net/wireless/reg.c
@@ -350,6 +350,9 @@ static void reg_regdb_search(struct work_struct *work)
struct reg_regdb_search_request *request;
const struct ieee80211_regdomain *curdom, *regdom;
int i, r;
+ bool set_reg = false;
+
+ mutex_lock(&cfg80211_mutex);

mutex_lock(&reg_regdb_search_mutex);
while (!list_empty(&reg_regdb_search_list)) {
@@ -365,9 +368,7 @@ static void reg_regdb_search(struct work_struct *work)
r = reg_copy_regd(&regdom, curdom);
if (r)
break;
- mutex_lock(&cfg80211_mutex);
- set_regdom(regdom);
- mutex_unlock(&cfg80211_mutex);
+ set_reg = true;
break;
}
}
@@ -375,6 +376,11 @@ static void reg_regdb_search(struct work_struct *work)
kfree(request);
}
mutex_unlock(&reg_regdb_search_mutex);
+
+ if (set_reg)
+ set_regdom(regdom);
+
+ mutex_unlock(&cfg80211_mutex);
}

static DECLARE_WORK(reg_regdb_work, reg_regdb_search);