linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Ciprian Docan <docan@eden.rutgers.edu>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
Subject: [PATCH] vfs: don't hold s_umount over close_bdev_exclusive() call
Date: Sat, 22 May 2010 16:52:20 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4BF7EFA4.4050901@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100521141445.bae41292.akpm@linux-foundation.org>

This patch fixes an obscure AB-BA deadlock in get_sb_bdev().

When a superblock is mounted more than once get_sb_bdev() calls
close_bdev_exclusive() to drop the extra bdev reference while holding
s_umount.  However, sb->s_umount nests inside bd_mutex during
__invalidate_device() and close_bdev_exclusive() acquires bd_mutex
during blkdev_put(); thus creating an AB-BA deadlock.

This condition doesn't trigger frequently.  For this condition to be
visible to lockdep, the filesystem must occupy the whole device (as
__invalidate_device() only grabs bd_mutex for the whole device), the
FS must be mounted more than once and partition rescan should be
issued while the FS is still mounted.

Fix it by dropping s_umount over close_bdev_exclusive().

Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Reported-by: Ciprian Docan <docan@eden.rutgers.edu>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
---
I think this fix is safe and seems to work fine here but I dunno know
the locking too well, so it would be best not to push it w/o Al's ack.

Thanks.

 fs/super.c |    9 +++++++++
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)

diff --git a/fs/super.c b/fs/super.c
index 1527e6a..667f706 100644
--- a/fs/super.c
+++ b/fs/super.c
@@ -821,7 +821,16 @@ int get_sb_bdev(struct file_system_type *fs_type,
 			goto error_bdev;
 		}

+		/*
+		 * s_umount nests inside bd_mutex during
+		 * __invalidate_device().  close_bdev_exclusive()
+		 * acquires bd_mutex and can't be called under
+		 * s_umount.  Drop s_umount temporarily.  This is safe
+		 * as we're holding an active reference.
+		 */
+		up_write(&s->s_umount);
 		close_bdev_exclusive(bdev, mode);
+		down_write(&s->s_umount);
 	} else {
 		char b[BDEVNAME_SIZE];


  reply	other threads:[~2010-05-22 14:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-05-20 16:34 possible circular locking dependency detected Ciprian Docan
2010-05-21 21:14 ` Andrew Morton
2010-05-22 14:52   ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2010-05-25  8:30     ` [PATCH] vfs: don't hold s_umount over close_bdev_exclusive() call Jens Axboe
2010-05-27  4:45       ` Al Viro

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=4BF7EFA4.4050901@kernel.org \
    --to=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=docan@eden.rutgers.edu \
    --cc=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).