Re: [BUG] fs/super: a possible sleep-in-atomic bug in put_super

Vladimir Davydov
2017-10-07T11:56:46Z

Hello,

On Fri, Oct 06, 2017 at 11:06:04AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Fri 06-10-17 16:59:18, Jia-Ju Bai wrote:
> > According to fs/super.c, the kernel may sleep under a spinlock.
> > The function call path is:
> > put_super (acquire the spinlock)
> > __put_super
> > destroy_super
> > list_lru_destroy
> > list_lru_unregister
> > mutex_lock --> may sleep
> > memcg_get_cache_ids
> > down_read --> may sleep
> >
> > This bug is found by my static analysis tool and my code review.

This is false-positive: by the time we get to destroy_super(), the lru
lists have already been destroyed - see deactivate_locked_super() - so
list_lru_destroy() will retrun right away without attempting to take any
locks. That's why there's no lockdep warnings regarding this issue.

I think we can move list_lru_destroy() to destroy_super_work() to
suppress this warning. Not sure if it's really worth the trouble though.

Thanks,
Vladimir