On 10/8/20 9:28 AM, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Thu, Oct 08, 2020 at 09:06:56AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: >> On 10/8/20 9:05 AM, Matthew Wilcox wrote: >>> On Thu, Oct 08, 2020 at 09:01:57AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: >>>> On 10/8/20 9:00 AM, syzbot wrote: >>>>> Hello, >>>>> >>>>> syzbot found the following issue on: >>>>> >>>>> HEAD commit: e4fb79c7 Add linux-next specific files for 20201008 >>>>> git tree: linux-next >>>>> console output: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/log.txt?x=12555227900000 >>>>> kernel config: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/.config?x=568d41fe4341ed0f >>>>> dashboard link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=cdcbdc0bd42e559b52b9 >>>>> compiler: gcc (GCC) 10.1.0-syz 20200507 >>>>> >>>>> Unfortunately, I don't have any reproducer for this issue yet. >>>>> >>>>> IMPORTANT: if you fix the issue, please add the following tag to the commit: >>>>> Reported-by: syzbot+cdcbdc0bd42e559b52b9@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>> >>>> Already pushed out a fix for this, it's really an xarray issue where it just >>>> assumes that destroy can irq grab the lock. >>> >>> ... nice of you to report the issue to the XArray maintainer. >> >> This is from not even 12h ago, 10h of which I was offline. It wasn't on >> the top of my list of priority items to tackle this morning, but it >> is/was on the list. > > How's this? Looks like that'll do the trick in avoiding similar future lockdep splats for xa_destroy(). -- Jens Axboe
