linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo.btrfs@gmx.com>
To: Edward Adam Davis <eadavis@qq.com>,
	syzbot+fa90fcaa28f5cd4b1fc1@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Cc: clm@fb.com, dsterba@suse.com, josef@toxicpanda.com,
	linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com, wqu@suse.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH next] btrfs: fix deadlock in btrfs_read_chunk_tree
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2025 06:00:09 +0930	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2e81c9bf-64ea-4d6b-a771-1befd4c319c8@gmx.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <tencent_C857B761776286CB137A836B096C03A34405@qq.com>



在 2025/6/25 00:00, Edward Adam Davis 写道:
> Remove the lock uuid_mutex outside of sget_fc() to avoid the deadlock
> reported by [1].
> 
> [1]
> -> #1 (&type->s_umount_key#41/1){+.+.}-{4:4}:
>         lock_acquire+0x120/0x360 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5871
>         down_write_nested+0x9d/0x200 kernel/locking/rwsem.c:1693
>         alloc_super+0x204/0x970 fs/super.c:345
>         sget_fc+0x329/0xa40 fs/super.c:761
>         btrfs_get_tree_super fs/btrfs/super.c:1867 [inline]
>         btrfs_get_tree_subvol fs/btrfs/super.c:2059 [inline]
>         btrfs_get_tree+0x4c6/0x12d0 fs/btrfs/super.c:2093
>         vfs_get_tree+0x8f/0x2b0 fs/super.c:1804
>         do_new_mount+0x24a/0xa40 fs/namespace.c:3902
>         do_mount fs/namespace.c:4239 [inline]
>         __do_sys_mount fs/namespace.c:4450 [inline]
>         __se_sys_mount+0x317/0x410 fs/namespace.c:4427
>         do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline]
>         do_syscall_64+0xfa/0x3b0 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94
>         entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
> 
> -> #0 (uuid_mutex){+.+.}-{4:4}:
>         check_prev_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3168 [inline]
>         check_prevs_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3287 [inline]
>         validate_chain+0xb9b/0x2140 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3911
>         __lock_acquire+0xab9/0xd20 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5240
>         lock_acquire+0x120/0x360 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5871
>         __mutex_lock_common kernel/locking/mutex.c:602 [inline]
>         __mutex_lock+0x182/0xe80 kernel/locking/mutex.c:747
>         btrfs_read_chunk_tree+0xef/0x2170 fs/btrfs/volumes.c:7462
>         open_ctree+0x17f2/0x3a10 fs/btrfs/disk-io.c:3458
>         btrfs_fill_super fs/btrfs/super.c:984 [inline]
>         btrfs_get_tree_super fs/btrfs/super.c:1922 [inline]
>         btrfs_get_tree_subvol fs/btrfs/super.c:2059 [inline]
>         btrfs_get_tree+0xc6f/0x12d0 fs/btrfs/super.c:2093
>         vfs_get_tree+0x8f/0x2b0 fs/super.c:1804
>         do_new_mount+0x24a/0xa40 fs/namespace.c:3902
>         do_mount fs/namespace.c:4239 [inline]
>         __do_sys_mount fs/namespace.c:4450 [inline]
>         __se_sys_mount+0x317/0x410 fs/namespace.c:4427
>         do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline]
>         do_syscall_64+0xfa/0x3b0 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94
>         entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
> 
> other info that might help us debug this:
> 
>   Possible unsafe locking scenario:
> 
>         CPU0                    CPU1
>         ----                    ----
>    lock(&type->s_umount_key#41/1);
>                                 lock(uuid_mutex);
>                                 lock(&type->s_umount_key#41/1);
>    lock(uuid_mutex);
> 
>   *** DEADLOCK ***
> 
> Fixes: 7aacdf6feed1 ("btrfs: delay btrfs_open_devices() until super block is created")
> Reported-by: syzbot+fa90fcaa28f5cd4b1fc1@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
> Closes: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=fa90fcaa28f5cd4b1fc1
> Tested-by: syzbot+fa90fcaa28f5cd4b1fc1@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
> Signed-off-by: Edward Adam Davis <eadavis@qq.com>
> ---
>   fs/btrfs/super.c | 7 ++++---
>   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/super.c b/fs/btrfs/super.c
> index 237e60b53192..c2ce1eb53ad7 100644
> --- a/fs/btrfs/super.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/super.c
> @@ -1864,11 +1864,10 @@ static int btrfs_get_tree_super(struct fs_context *fc)
>   	fs_devices = device->fs_devices;
>   	fs_info->fs_devices = fs_devices;
>   
> +	mutex_unlock(&uuid_mutex);

No, you can not unlock uuid_mutex without opening the devices.

Just run the test case generic/604.

>   	sb = sget_fc(fc, btrfs_fc_test_super, set_anon_super_fc);
> -	if (IS_ERR(sb)) {
> -		mutex_unlock(&uuid_mutex);
> +	if (IS_ERR(sb))
>   		return PTR_ERR(sb);
> -	}
>   
>   	set_device_specific_options(fs_info);
>   
> @@ -1887,6 +1886,7 @@ static int btrfs_get_tree_super(struct fs_context *fc)
>   		 * But the fs_info->fs_devices is not opened, we should not let
>   		 * btrfs_free_fs_context() to close them.
>   		 */
> +		mutex_lock(&uuid_mutex);
>   		fs_info->fs_devices = NULL;
>   		mutex_unlock(&uuid_mutex);
>   
> @@ -1906,6 +1906,7 @@ static int btrfs_get_tree_super(struct fs_context *fc)
>   		 */
>   		ASSERT(fc->s_fs_info == NULL);
>   
> +		mutex_lock(&uuid_mutex);
>   		ret = btrfs_open_devices(fs_devices, mode, sb);
>   		mutex_unlock(&uuid_mutex);
>   		if (ret < 0) {



  reply	other threads:[~2025-06-24 20:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-06-24 13:11 [syzbot] [btrfs?] possible deadlock in btrfs_read_chunk_tree syzbot
2025-06-24 13:56 ` Edward Adam Davis
2025-06-24 14:27   ` syzbot
2025-06-24 14:30 ` [PATCH next] btrfs: fix " Edward Adam Davis
2025-06-24 20:30   ` Qu Wenruo [this message]
2025-06-24 23:56     ` Hillf Danton
2025-06-25 10:49       ` Qu Wenruo
2025-06-25 12:40         ` Hillf Danton
2025-06-25 21:29           ` Qu Wenruo
2025-06-25 23:44             ` Hillf Danton
2025-06-29  4:27               ` Qu Wenruo
2025-06-29  4:59                 ` Hillf Danton
2025-06-29  5:05                   ` Qu Wenruo
2025-06-26  6:05 ` [syzbot] [btrfs?] possible " Qu Wenruo
2025-06-26  6:37   ` syzbot
2025-06-26  8:40     ` Qu Wenruo
2025-06-26 12:30       ` syzbot

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=2e81c9bf-64ea-4d6b-a771-1befd4c319c8@gmx.com \
    --to=quwenruo.btrfs@gmx.com \
    --cc=clm@fb.com \
    --cc=dsterba@suse.com \
    --cc=eadavis@qq.com \
    --cc=josef@toxicpanda.com \
    --cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=syzbot+fa90fcaa28f5cd4b1fc1@syzkaller.appspotmail.com \
    --cc=syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com \
    --cc=wqu@suse.com \
    /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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).