[PATCH 5.15 029/207] btrfs: silence lockdep when reading chunk tree during mount

Greg Kroah-Hartman
2021-12-06T15:36:00Z

From: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>

[ Upstream commit 4d9380e0da7be2351437cdac71673a9cd94e50fd ]

Often some test cases like btrfs/161 trigger lockdep splats that complain
about possible unsafe lock scenario due to the fact that during mount,
when reading the chunk tree we end up calling blkdev_get_by_path() while
holding a read lock on a leaf of the chunk tree. That produces a lockdep
splat like the following:

[ 3653.683975] ======================================================
[ 3653.685148] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
[ 3653.686301] 5.15.0-rc7-btrfs-next-103 #1 Not tainted
[ 3653.687239] ------------------------------------------------------
[ 3653.688400] mount/447465 is trying to acquire lock:
[ 3653.689320] ffff8c6b0c76e528 (&disk->open_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: blkdev_get_by_dev.part.0+0xe7/0x320
[ 3653.691054]
but task is already holding lock:
[ 3653.692155] ffff8c6b0a9f39e0 (btrfs-chunk-00){++++}-{3:3}, at: __btrfs_tree_read_lock+0x24/0x110 [btrfs]
[ 3653.693978]
which lock already depends on the new lock.

[ 3653.695510]
the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
[ 3653.696915]
-> #3 (btrfs-chunk-00){++++}-{3:3}:
[ 3653.698053] down_read_nested+0x4b/0x140
[ 3653.698893] __btrfs_tree_read_lock+0x24/0x110 [btrfs]
[ 3653.699988] btrfs_read_lock_root_node+0x31/0x40 [btrfs]
[ 3653.701205] btrfs_search_slot+0x537/0xc00 [btrfs]
[ 3653.702234] btrfs_insert_empty_items+0x32/0x70 [btrfs]
[ 3653.703332] btrfs_init_new_device+0x563/0x15b0 [btrfs]
[ 3653.704439] btrfs_ioctl+0x2110/0x3530 [btrfs]
[ 3653.705405] __x64_sys_ioctl+0x83/0xb0
[ 3653.706215] do_syscall_64+0x3b/0xc0
[ 3653.706990] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae
[ 3653.708040]
-> #2 (sb_internal#2){.+.+}-{0:0}:
[ 3653.708994] lock_release+0x13d/0x4a0
[ 3653.709533] up_write+0x18/0x160
[ 3653.710017] btrfs_sync_file+0x3f3/0x5b0 [btrfs]
[ 3653.710699] __loop_update_dio+0xbd/0x170 [loop]
[ 3653.711360] lo_ioctl+0x3b1/0x8a0 [loop]
[ 3653.711929] block_ioctl+0x48/0x50
[ 3653.712442] __x64_sys_ioctl+0x83/0xb0
[ 3653.712991] do_syscall_64+0x3b/0xc0
[ 3653.713519] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae
[ 3653.714233]
-> #1 (&lo->lo_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}:
[ 3653.715026] __mutex_lock+0x92/0x900
[ 3653.715648] lo_open+0x28/0x60 [loop]
[ 3653.716275] blkdev_get_whole+0x28/0x90
[ 3653.716867] blkdev_get_by_dev.part.0+0x142/0x320
[ 3653.717537] blkdev_open+0x5e/0xa0
[ 3653.718043] do_dentry_open+0x163/0x390
[ 3653.718604] path_openat+0x3f0/0xa80
[ 3653.719128] do_filp_open+0xa9/0x150
[ 3653.719652] do_sys_openat2+0x97/0x160
[ 3653.720197] __x64_sys_openat+0x54/0x90
[ 3653.720766] do_syscall_64+0x3b/0xc0
[ 3653.721285] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae
[ 3653.721986]
-> #0 (&disk->open_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}:
[ 3653.722775] __lock_acquire+0x130e/0x2210
[ 3653.723348] lock_acquire+0xd7/0x310
[ 3653.723867] __mutex_lock+0x92/0x900
[ 3653.724394] blkdev_get_by_dev.part.0+0xe7/0x320
[ 3653.725041] blkdev_get_by_path+0xb8/0xd0
[ 3653.725614] btrfs_get_bdev_and_sb+0x1b/0xb0 [btrfs]
[ 3653.726332] open_fs_devices+0xd7/0x2c0 [btrfs]
[ 3653.726999] btrfs_read_chunk_tree+0x3ad/0x870 [btrfs]
[ 3653.727739] open_ctree+0xb8e/0x17bf [btrfs]
[ 3653.728384] btrfs_mount_root.cold+0x12/0xde [btrfs]
[ 3653.729130] legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x50
[ 3653.729676] vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0
[ 3653.730192] vfs_kern_mount.part.0+0x71/0xb0
[ 3653.730800] btrfs_mount+0x11d/0x3a0 [btrfs]
[ 3653.731427] legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x50
[ 3653.731970] vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0
[ 3653.732486] path_mount+0x2d4/0xbe0
[ 3653.732997] __x64_sys_mount+0x103/0x140
[ 3653.733560] do_syscall_64+0x3b/0xc0
[ 3653.734080] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae
[ 3653.734782]
other info that might help us debug this:

[ 3653.735784] Chain exists of:
&disk->open_mutex --> sb_internal#2 --> btrfs-chunk-00

[ 3653.737123] Possible unsafe locking scenario:

[ 3653.737865] CPU0 CPU1
[ 3653.738435] ---- ----
[ 3653.739007] lock(btrfs-chunk-00);
[ 3653.739449] lock(sb_internal#2);
[ 3653.740193] lock(btrfs-chunk-00);
[ 3653.740955] lock(&disk->open_mutex);
[ 3653.741431]
*** DEADLOCK ***

[ 3653.742176] 3 locks held by mount/447465:
[ 3653.742739] #0: ffff8c6acf85c0e8 (&type->s_umount_key#44/1){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: alloc_super+0xd5/0x3b0
[ 3653.744114] #1: ffffffffc0b28f70 (uuid_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: btrfs_read_chunk_tree+0x59/0x870 [btrfs]
[ 3653.745563] #2: ffff8c6b0a9f39e0 (btrfs-chunk-00){++++}-{3:3}, at: __btrfs_tree_read_lock+0x24/0x110 [btrfs]
[ 3653.747066]
stack backtrace:
[ 3653.747723] CPU: 4 PID: 447465 Comm: mount Not tainted 5.15.0-rc7-btrfs-next-103 #1
[ 3653.748873] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS rel-1.14.0-0-g155821a1990b-prebuilt.qemu.org 04/01/2014
[ 3653.750592] Call Trace:
[ 3653.750967] dump_stack_lvl+0x57/0x72
[ 3653.751526] check_noncircular+0xf3/0x110
[ 3653.752136] ? stack_trace_save+0x4b/0x70
[ 3653.752748] __lock_acquire+0x130e/0x2210
[ 3653.753356] lock_acquire+0xd7/0x310
[ 3653.753898] ? blkdev_get_by_dev.part.0+0xe7/0x320
[ 3653.754596] ? lock_is_held_type+0xe8/0x140
[ 3653.755125] ? blkdev_get_by_dev.part.0+0xe7/0x320
[ 3653.755729] ? blkdev_get_by_dev.part.0+0xe7/0x320
[ 3653.756338] __mutex_lock+0x92/0x900
[ 3653.756794] ? blkdev_get_by_dev.part.0+0xe7/0x320
[ 3653.757400] ? do_raw_spin_unlock+0x4b/0xa0
[ 3653.757930] ? _raw_spin_unlock+0x29/0x40
[ 3653.758437] ? bd_prepare_to_claim+0x129/0x150
[ 3653.758999] ? trace_module_get+0x2b/0xd0
[ 3653.759508] ? try_module_get.part.0+0x50/0x80
[ 3653.760072] blkdev_get_by_dev.part.0+0xe7/0x320
[ 3653.760661] ? devcgroup_check_permission+0xc1/0x1f0
[ 3653.761288] blkdev_get_by_path+0xb8/0xd0
[ 3653.761797] btrfs_get_bdev_and_sb+0x1b/0xb0 [btrfs]
[ 3653.762454] open_fs_devices+0xd7/0x2c0 [btrfs]
[ 3653.763055] ? clone_fs_devices+0x8f/0x170 [btrfs]
[ 3653.763689] btrfs_read_chunk_tree+0x3ad/0x870 [btrfs]
[ 3653.764370] ? kvm_sched_clock_read+0x14/0x40
[ 3653.764922] open_ctree+0xb8e/0x17bf [btrfs]
[ 3653.765493] ? super_setup_bdi_name+0x79/0xd0
[ 3653.766043] btrfs_mount_root.cold+0x12/0xde [btrfs]
[ 3653.766780] ? rcu_read_lock_sched_held+0x3f/0x80
[ 3653.767488] ? kfree+0x1f2/0x3c0
[ 3653.767979] legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x50
[ 3653.768548] vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0
[ 3653.769076] vfs_kern_mount.part.0+0x71/0xb0
[ 3653.769718] btrfs_mount+0x11d/0x3a0 [btrfs]
[ 3653.770381] ? rcu_read_lock_sched_held+0x3f/0x80
[ 3653.771086] ? kfree+0x1f2/0x3c0
[ 3653.771574] legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x50
[ 3653.772136] vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0
[ 3653.772673] path_mount+0x2d4/0xbe0
[ 3653.773201] __x64_sys_mount+0x103/0x140
[ 3653.773793] do_syscall_64+0x3b/0xc0
[ 3653.774333] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae
[ 3653.775094] RIP: 0033:0x7f648bc45aaa

This happens because through btrfs_read_chunk_tree(), which is called only
during mount, ends up acquiring the mutex open_mutex of a block device
while holding a read lock on a leaf of the chunk tree while other paths
need to acquire other locks before locking extent buffers of the chunk
tree.

Since at mount time when we call btrfs_read_chunk_tree() we know that
we don't have other tasks running in parallel and modifying the chunk
tree, we can simply skip locking of chunk tree extent buffers. So do
that and move the assertion that checks the fs is not yet mounted to the
top block of btrfs_read_chunk_tree(), with a comment before doing it.

Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@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, 13 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
index bc2e4683e8568..7bf09ca82137a 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c
@@ -7488,6 +7488,19 @@ int btrfs_read_chunk_tree(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info)
*/
fs_info->fs_devices->total_rw_bytes = 0;

+ /*
+ * Lockdep complains about possible circular locking dependency between
+ * a disk's open_mutex (struct gendisk.open_mutex), the rw semaphores
+ * used for freeze procection of a fs (struct super_block.s_writers),
+ * which we take when starting a transaction, and extent buffers of the
+ * chunk tree if we call read_one_dev() while holding a lock on an
+ * extent buffer of the chunk tree. Since we are mounting the filesystem
+ * and at this point there can't be any concurrent task modifying the
+ * chunk tree, to keep it simple, just skip locking on the chunk tree.
+ */
+ ASSERT(!test_bit(BTRFS_FS_OPEN, &fs_info->flags));
+ path->skip_locking = 1;
+
/*
* Read all device items, and then all the chunk items. All
* device items are found before any chunk item (their object id
@@ -7513,10 +7526,6 @@ int btrfs_read_chunk_tree(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info)
goto error;
break;
}
- /*
- * The nodes on level 1 are not locked but we don't need to do
- * that during mount time as nothing else can access the tree
- */
node = path->nodes[1];
if (node) {
if (last_ra_node != node->start) {
@@ -7544,7 +7553,6 @@ int btrfs_read_chunk_tree(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info)
* requirement for chunk allocation, see the comment on
* top of btrfs_chunk_alloc() for details.
*/
- ASSERT(!test_bit(BTRFS_FS_OPEN, &fs_info->flags));
chunk = btrfs_item_ptr(leaf, slot, struct btrfs_chunk);
ret = read_one_chunk(&found_key, leaf, chunk);
if (ret)
--
2.33.0