Re: [PATCH v5.10.y 1/1] io_uring: don't take uring_lock during iowq cancel

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 03:08:02PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> From: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@xxxxxxxxx>
> 
> [ Upstream commit 792bb6eb862333658bf1bd2260133f0507e2da8d ]
> 
> [   97.866748] a.out/2890 is trying to acquire lock:
> [   97.867829] ffff8881046763e8 (&ctx->uring_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at:
> io_wq_submit_work+0x155/0x240
> [   97.869735]
> [   97.869735] but task is already holding lock:
> [   97.871033] ffff88810dfe0be8 (&ctx->uring_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at:
> __x64_sys_io_uring_enter+0x3f0/0x5b0
> [   97.873074]
> [   97.873074] other info that might help us debug this:
> [   97.874520]  Possible unsafe locking scenario:
> [   97.874520]
> [   97.875845]        CPU0
> [   97.876440]        ----
> [   97.877048]   lock(&ctx->uring_lock);
> [   97.877961]   lock(&ctx->uring_lock);
> [   97.878881]
> [   97.878881]  *** DEADLOCK ***
> [   97.878881]
> [   97.880341]  May be due to missing lock nesting notation
> [   97.880341]
> [   97.881952] 1 lock held by a.out/2890:
> [   97.882873]  #0: ffff88810dfe0be8 (&ctx->uring_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at:
> __x64_sys_io_uring_enter+0x3f0/0x5b0
> [   97.885108]
> [   97.885108] stack backtrace:
> [   97.890457] Call Trace:
> [   97.891121]  dump_stack+0xac/0xe3
> [   97.891972]  __lock_acquire+0xab6/0x13a0
> [   97.892940]  lock_acquire+0x2c3/0x390
> [   97.894894]  __mutex_lock+0xae/0x9f0
> [   97.901101]  io_wq_submit_work+0x155/0x240
> [   97.902112]  io_wq_cancel_cb+0x162/0x490
> [   97.904126]  io_async_find_and_cancel+0x3b/0x140
> [   97.905247]  io_issue_sqe+0x86d/0x13e0
> [   97.909122]  __io_queue_sqe+0x10b/0x550
> [   97.913971]  io_queue_sqe+0x235/0x470
> [   97.914894]  io_submit_sqes+0xcce/0xf10
> [   97.917872]  __x64_sys_io_uring_enter+0x3fb/0x5b0
> [   97.921424]  do_syscall_64+0x2d/0x40
> [   97.922329]  entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
> 
> While holding uring_lock, e.g. from inline execution, async cancel
> request may attempt cancellations through io_wq_submit_work, which may
> try to grab a lock. Delay it to task_work, so we do it from a clean
> context and don't have to worry about locking.
> 
> Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> # 5.5+
> Fixes: c07e6719511e ("io_uring: hold uring_lock while completing failed polled io in io_wq_submit_work()")
> Reported-by: Abaci <abaci@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Reported-by: Hao Xu <haoxu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@xxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx>
> [Lee: The first hunk solves a different (double free) issue in v5.10.
>       Only the first hunk of the original patch is relevant to v5.10 AND
>       the first hunk of the original patch is only relevant to v5.10]
> Reported-by: syzbot+59d8a1f4e60c20c066cf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@xxxxxxxxxx>

Now queued up, thanks.

greg k-h



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Samsung SoC]     [Linux Rockchip SoC]     [Linux Actions SoC]     [Linux for Synopsys ARC Processors]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux