Hello, syzbot found the following issue on: HEAD commit: 568ebdaba637 MAINTAINERS: adjust file entry in FREESCALE Q.. git tree: net-next console output: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/log.txt?x=12f58a61980000 kernel config: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/.config?x=e78fc116033e0ab7 dashboard link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=bef85a6996d1737c1a2f compiler: Debian clang version 15.0.6, GNU ld (GNU Binutils for Debian) 2.40 Unfortunately, I don't have any reproducer for this issue yet. Downloadable assets: disk image: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/1d754ea220a6/disk-568ebdab.raw.xz vmlinux: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/232f2545fca4/vmlinux-568ebdab.xz kernel image: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/6398bb41810d/bzImage-568ebdab.xz IMPORTANT: if you fix the issue, please add the following tag to the commit: Reported-by: syzbot+bef85a6996d1737c1a2f@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ====================================================== WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected 6.10.0-rc4-syzkaller-00875-g568ebdaba637 #0 Not tainted ------------------------------------------------------ syz-executor.1/11818 is trying to acquire lock: ffff888023600a50 (&smc->clcsock_release_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: smc_switch_to_fallback+0x35/0xd00 net/smc/af_smc.c:902 but task is already holding lock: ffff888023600258 (sk_lock-AF_INET){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: lock_sock include/net/sock.h:1602 [inline] ffff888023600258 (sk_lock-AF_INET){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: smc_sendmsg+0x55/0x530 net/smc/af_smc.c:2773 which lock already depends on the new lock. the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is: -> #2 (sk_lock-AF_INET){+.+.}-{0:0}: lock_acquire+0x1ed/0x550 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5754 lock_sock_nested+0x48/0x100 net/core/sock.c:3543 do_ip_setsockopt+0x1a2d/0x3cd0 net/ipv4/ip_sockglue.c:1078 ip_setsockopt+0x63/0x100 net/ipv4/ip_sockglue.c:1417 do_sock_setsockopt+0x3af/0x720 net/socket.c:2312 __sys_setsockopt+0x1ae/0x250 net/socket.c:2335 __do_sys_setsockopt net/socket.c:2344 [inline] __se_sys_setsockopt net/socket.c:2341 [inline] __x64_sys_setsockopt+0xb5/0xd0 net/socket.c:2341 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/common.c:52 [inline] do_syscall_64+0xf3/0x230 arch/x86/entry/common.c:83 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f -> #1 (rtnl_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}: lock_acquire+0x1ed/0x550 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5754 __mutex_lock_common kernel/locking/mutex.c:608 [inline] __mutex_lock+0x136/0xd70 kernel/locking/mutex.c:752 do_ip_setsockopt+0x127d/0x3cd0 net/ipv4/ip_sockglue.c:1077 ip_setsockopt+0x63/0x100 net/ipv4/ip_sockglue.c:1417 smc_setsockopt+0x275/0xe50 net/smc/af_smc.c:3072 do_sock_setsockopt+0x3af/0x720 net/socket.c:2312 __sys_setsockopt+0x1ae/0x250 net/socket.c:2335 __do_sys_setsockopt net/socket.c:2344 [inline] __se_sys_setsockopt net/socket.c:2341 [inline] __x64_sys_setsockopt+0xb5/0xd0 net/socket.c:2341 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/common.c:52 [inline] do_syscall_64+0xf3/0x230 arch/x86/entry/common.c:83 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f -> #0 (&smc->clcsock_release_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}: check_prev_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3134 [inline] check_prevs_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3253 [inline] validate_chain+0x18e0/0x5900 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3869 __lock_acquire+0x1346/0x1fd0 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5137 lock_acquire+0x1ed/0x550 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5754 __mutex_lock_common kernel/locking/mutex.c:608 [inline] __mutex_lock+0x136/0xd70 kernel/locking/mutex.c:752 smc_switch_to_fallback+0x35/0xd00 net/smc/af_smc.c:902 smc_sendmsg+0x11f/0x530 net/smc/af_smc.c:2779 sock_sendmsg_nosec net/socket.c:730 [inline] __sock_sendmsg+0x221/0x270 net/socket.c:745 ____sys_sendmsg+0x525/0x7d0 net/socket.c:2585 ___sys_sendmsg net/socket.c:2639 [inline] __sys_sendmsg+0x2b0/0x3a0 net/socket.c:2668 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/common.c:52 [inline] do_syscall_64+0xf3/0x230 arch/x86/entry/common.c:83 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f other info that might help us debug this: Chain exists of: &smc->clcsock_release_lock --> rtnl_mutex --> sk_lock-AF_INET Possible unsafe locking scenario: CPU0 CPU1 ---- ---- lock(sk_lock-AF_INET); lock(rtnl_mutex); lock(sk_lock-AF_INET); lock(&smc->clcsock_release_lock); *** DEADLOCK *** 1 lock held by syz-executor.1/11818: #0: ffff888023600258 (sk_lock-AF_INET){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: lock_sock include/net/sock.h:1602 [inline] #0: ffff888023600258 (sk_lock-AF_INET){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: smc_sendmsg+0x55/0x530 net/smc/af_smc.c:2773 stack backtrace: CPU: 0 PID: 11818 Comm: syz-executor.1 Not tainted 6.10.0-rc4-syzkaller-00875-g568ebdaba637 #0 Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 06/07/2024 Call Trace: <TASK> __dump_stack lib/dump_stack.c:88 [inline] dump_stack_lvl+0x241/0x360 lib/dump_stack.c:114 --- This report is generated by a bot. It may contain errors. See https://goo.gl/tpsmEJ for more information about syzbot. syzbot engineers can be reached at syzkaller@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx. syzbot will keep track of this issue. See: https://goo.gl/tpsmEJ#status for how to communicate with syzbot. If the report is already addressed, let syzbot know by replying with: #syz fix: exact-commit-title If you want to overwrite report's subsystems, reply with: #syz set subsystems: new-subsystem (See the list of subsystem names on the web dashboard) If the report is a duplicate of another one, reply with: #syz dup: exact-subject-of-another-report If you want to undo deduplication, reply with: #syz undup
