On Fri, Mar 15, 2024 at 12:16:39PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > From: Dave Chinner <dchinner@xxxxxxxxxx> > > In converting the XFS code from GFP_NOFS to scoped contexts, we > converted the quota radix tree to GFP_KERNEL. Unfortunately, it was > not clearly documented that this set was because there is a > dependency on the quotainfo->qi_tree_lock being taken in memory > reclaim to remove dquots from the radix tree. > > In hindsight this is obvious, but the radix tree allocations on > insert are not immediately obvious, and we avoid this for the inode > cache radix trees by using preloading and hence completely avoiding > the radix tree node allocation under tree lock constraints. > > Hence there are a few solutions here. The first is to reinstate > GFP_NOFS for the radix tree and add a comment explaining why > GFP_NOFS is used. The second is to use memalloc_nofs_save() on the > radix tree insert context, which makes it obvious that the radix > tree insert runs under GFP_NOFS constraints. The third option is to > simply replace the radix tree and it's lock with an xarray which can > do memory allocation safely in an insert context. > > The first is OK, but not really the direction we want to head. The > second is my preferred short term solution. The third - converting > XFS radix trees to xarray - is the longer term solution. > > Hence to fix the regression here, we take option 2 as it moves us in > the direction we want to head with memory allocation and GFP_NOFS > removal. > > Reported-by: syzbot+8fdff861a781522bda4d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Reported-by: syzbot+d247769793ec169e4bf9@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Fixes: 94a69db2367e ("xfs: use __GFP_NOLOCKDEP instead of GFP_NOFS") > Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > fs/xfs/xfs_dquot.c | 18 +++++++++++++----- > 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_dquot.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_dquot.c > index d2c7fcc2ea6b..9c027e44d88f 100644 > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_dquot.c > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_dquot.c > @@ -811,6 +811,12 @@ xfs_qm_dqget_cache_lookup( > * caller should throw away the dquot and start over. Otherwise, the dquot > * is returned locked (and held by the cache) as if there had been a cache > * hit. > + * > + * The insert needs to be done under memalloc_nofs context because the radix > + * tree can do memory allocation during insert. The qi->qi_tree_lock is taken in > + * memory reclaim when freeing unused dquots, so we cannot have the radix tree > + * node allocation recursing into filesystem reclaim whilst we hold the > + * qi_tree_lock. Sounds reasonable to me, Reviewed-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@xxxxxxxxxx> --D > */ > static int > xfs_qm_dqget_cache_insert( > @@ -820,25 +826,27 @@ xfs_qm_dqget_cache_insert( > xfs_dqid_t id, > struct xfs_dquot *dqp) > { > + unsigned int nofs_flags; > int error; > > + nofs_flags = memalloc_nofs_save(); > mutex_lock(&qi->qi_tree_lock); > error = radix_tree_insert(tree, id, dqp); > if (unlikely(error)) { > /* Duplicate found! Caller must try again. */ > - mutex_unlock(&qi->qi_tree_lock); > trace_xfs_dqget_dup(dqp); > - return error; > + goto out_unlock; > } > > /* Return a locked dquot to the caller, with a reference taken. */ > xfs_dqlock(dqp); > dqp->q_nrefs = 1; > - > qi->qi_dquots++; > - mutex_unlock(&qi->qi_tree_lock); > > - return 0; > +out_unlock: > + mutex_unlock(&qi->qi_tree_lock); > + memalloc_nofs_restore(nofs_flags); > + return error; > } > > /* Check our input parameters. */ > -- > 2.43.0 > >