From: "Zhou, Yun" <yun.zhou@windriver.com>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, sdf.kernel@gmail.com
Cc: jirislaby@kernel.org, socketcan@hartkopp.net,
linux-serial@vger.kernel.org, mkl@pengutronix.de,
linux-can@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net,
edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com,
horms@kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tty: ldisc: fix deadlock between ldisc_sem and rtnl_mutex
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2026 11:03:18 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87ea3ae8-8196-4f6f-bb03-d139f2f6c806@windriver.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2026071655-steering-cardstock-cd06@gregkh>
On 7/16/26 15:57, Greg KH wrote:
> CAUTION: This email comes from a non Wind River email account!
> Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
>
> On Thu, Jul 16, 2026 at 02:47:19PM +0800, Yun Zhou wrote:
>> syzbot reported a circular lock dependency involving tty ldisc_sem and
>> the networking rtnl_mutex. The full chain is:
>>
>> rtnl_mutex --> nft_commit_mutex --> ... --> ep->mtx --> ldisc_sem --> rtnl_mutex
>>
>> The last edge (ldisc_sem -> rtnl_mutex) is created because tty line
>> discipline .open() callbacks (slcan, slip) call register_netdev() which
>> acquires rtnl_mutex, and .open() runs under ldisc_sem write lock in
>> tty_set_ldisc().
>>
>> Fix by moving the .open() call outside the ldisc_sem write lock. The
>> ldisc .open() is initialization of the NEW discipline after the old one
>> has been closed - there is no need for ldisc_sem protection at this
>> point since:
>>
>> - tty_lock is held throughout, preventing concurrent tty_set_ldisc,
>> hangup, or close
>> - tty->ldisc is set to NULL during the window, so concurrent readers
>> (tty_ldisc_ref, tty_ldisc_ref_wait) see NULL and return immediately,
>> which callers already handle as a hangup condition
>> - tty buffer data stays queued until the ldisc is installed
>>
>> The sequence becomes:
>> 1. Hold ldisc_sem(write): close old ldisc, set tty->ldisc = NULL
>> 2. Release ldisc_sem(write)
>> 3. Call new_ldisc->ops->open() without ldisc_sem
>> 4. Re-acquire ldisc_sem(write): install new ldisc (or restore old)
>> 5. Release ldisc_sem(write)
>>
>> Reported-by: syzbot+de610eeef174bd59a8a3@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
>> Closes: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=de610eeef174bd59a8a3
>> Signed-off-by: Yun Zhou <yun.zhou@windriver.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/tty/tty_ldisc.c | 17 +++++++++++++++--
>> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> What commit caused this to be a problem and why have we not seen this in
> any real-world usages?
>
The circular dependency has existed for a long time - it just requires
ldisc_sem -> rtnl_mutex (from slcan/slip registering a netdev in
.open()) and the reverse path through nft_commit_mutex, epoll, and
tty_poll back to ldisc_sem.
The recent dev_instance_lock series (5326fefb9fe8 "net: hold instance
lock around NETDEV_DOWN/GOING_DOWN") increased lockdep's observability
by adding lock acquisitions in more notifier paths, making it easier for
lockdep to collect all edges in a single run. It did not create the
cycle.
We have not seen this in real-world usage because triggering the actual
deadlock requires 6 unrelated subsystems to contend simultaneously -
something only a fuzzer like syzkaller would construct.
>
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/tty/tty_ldisc.c b/drivers/tty/tty_ldisc.c
>> index 27fe8236f662..248a6995cc53 100644
>> --- a/drivers/tty/tty_ldisc.c
>> +++ b/drivers/tty/tty_ldisc.c
>> @@ -556,15 +556,28 @@ int tty_set_ldisc(struct tty_struct *tty, int disc)
>> /* Shutdown the old discipline. */
>> tty_ldisc_close(tty, old_ldisc);
>>
>> - /* Now set up the new line discipline. */
>> - tty->ldisc = new_ldisc;
>> + /* Clear tty->ldisc so concurrent readers back off during transition */
>> + tty->ldisc = NULL;
>> tty_set_termios_ldisc(tty, disc);
>> + tty_ldisc_unlock(tty);
>>
>> + /*
>> + * Open the new discipline outside ldisc_sem. The ldisc .open()
>> + * may acquire locks (e.g., rtnl_mutex) that would create circular
>> + * dependencies if taken under ldisc_sem. tty_lock is still held,
>> + * preventing concurrent ldisc changes and hangup.
>> + */
>> retval = tty_ldisc_open(tty, new_ldisc);
>
> Now you are calling open when previously we were not, are you sure this
> isn't going to cause problems?
>
This is not a new .open() call - it is the same tty_ldisc_open() that
was always called here. The change only moves it outside ldisc_sem.
tty_lock is still held throughout, so .open() sees the same environment
as before.
>> +
>> + tty_ldisc_lock(tty, MAX_SCHEDULE_TIMEOUT);
>
> Why that timeout?
>
>> +
>> if (retval < 0) {
>> /* Back to the old one or N_TTY if we can't */
>> tty_ldisc_put(new_ldisc);
>> tty_ldisc_restore(tty, old_ldisc);
>> + } else {
>> + /* Success - install new ldisc */
>> + tty->ldisc = new_ldisc;
>> }
>
> Does open cause anything else to be incremented that you have to clean
> up when done that you aren't doing here?
>
tty_ldisc_open() only sets the TTY_LDISC_OPEN flag bit and calls
ld->ops->open(). On failure it clears the flag itself.
No refcounts or other state are incremented by tty_ldisc_open() that
would need additional cleanup.
BR,
Yun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-17 3:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-16 6:47 [PATCH] tty: ldisc: fix deadlock between ldisc_sem and rtnl_mutex Yun Zhou
2026-07-16 7:57 ` Greg KH
2026-07-17 3:03 ` Zhou, Yun [this message]
2026-07-17 10:51 ` Greg KH
2026-07-16 7:59 ` Jagielski, Jedrzej
2026-07-17 3:42 ` Zhou, Yun
2026-07-17 6:50 ` Oliver Hartkopp
2026-07-17 7:02 ` Jagielski, Jedrzej
2026-07-17 10:53 ` Greg KH
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=87ea3ae8-8196-4f6f-bb03-d139f2f6c806@windriver.com \
--to=yun.zhou@windriver.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=horms@kernel.org \
--cc=jirislaby@kernel.org \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-can@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-serial@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mkl@pengutronix.de \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=sdf.kernel@gmail.com \
--cc=socketcan@hartkopp.net \
/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