You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
When a CIFS filesystem is mounted with the forcemand option and the
following command is run on it, lockdep warns about a circular locking
dependency between CifsInodeInfo::lock_sem and the inode lock.
while echo foo > hello; do :; done & while touch -c hello; do :; done
cifs_writev() takes the locks in the wrong order, but note that we can't
only flip the order around because it releases the inode lock before the
call to generic_write_sync() while it holds the lock_sem across that
call.
But, AFAICS, there is no need to hold the CifsInodeInfo::lock_sem across
the generic_write_sync() call either, so we can release both the locks
before generic_write_sync(), and change the order.
======================================================
WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
4.12.0-rc7+ #9 Not tainted
------------------------------------------------------
touch/487 is trying to acquire lock:
(&cifsi->lock_sem){++++..}, at: cifsFileInfo_put+0x88f/0x16a0
but task is already holding lock:
(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#11){+.+.+.}, at: utimes_common+0x3ad/0x870
which lock already depends on the new lock.
the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
-> #1 (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#11){+.+.+.}:
__lock_acquire+0x1f74/0x38f0
lock_acquire+0x1cc/0x600
down_write+0x74/0x110
cifs_strict_writev+0x3cb/0x8c0
__vfs_write+0x4c1/0x930
vfs_write+0x14c/0x2d0
SyS_write+0xf7/0x240
entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x1f/0xbe
-> #0 (&cifsi->lock_sem){++++..}:
check_prevs_add+0xfa0/0x1d10
__lock_acquire+0x1f74/0x38f0
lock_acquire+0x1cc/0x600
down_write+0x74/0x110
cifsFileInfo_put+0x88f/0x16a0
cifs_setattr+0x992/0x1680
notify_change+0x61a/0xa80
utimes_common+0x3d4/0x870
do_utimes+0x1c1/0x220
SyS_utimensat+0x84/0x1a0
entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x1f/0xbe
other info that might help us debug this:
Possible unsafe locking scenario:
CPU0 CPU1
---- ----
lock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#11);
lock(&cifsi->lock_sem);
lock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#11);
lock(&cifsi->lock_sem);
*** DEADLOCK ***
2 locks held by touch/487:
#0: (sb_writers#10){.+.+.+}, at: mnt_want_write+0x41/0xb0
#1: (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#11){+.+.+.}, at: utimes_common+0x3ad/0x870
stack backtrace:
CPU: 0 PID: 487 Comm: touch Not tainted 4.12.0-rc7+ #9
Call Trace:
dump_stack+0xdb/0x185
print_circular_bug+0x45b/0x790
__lock_acquire+0x1f74/0x38f0
lock_acquire+0x1cc/0x600
down_write+0x74/0x110
cifsFileInfo_put+0x88f/0x16a0
cifs_setattr+0x992/0x1680
notify_change+0x61a/0xa80
utimes_common+0x3d4/0x870
do_utimes+0x1c1/0x220
SyS_utimensat+0x84/0x1a0
entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x1f/0xbe
Fixes: 19dfc1f ("cifs: fix the race in cifs_writev()")
Signed-off-by: Rabin Vincent <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Steve French <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Pavel Shilovsky <[email protected]>
0 commit comments