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
smb: client: fix potential deadlock when reconnecting channels
Fix cifs_signal_cifsd_for_reconnect() to take the correct lock order
and prevent the following deadlock from happening
======================================================
WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
6.16.0-rc3-build2+ torvalds#1301 Tainted: G S W
------------------------------------------------------
cifsd/6055 is trying to acquire lock:
ffff88810ad56038 (&tcp_ses->srv_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: cifs_signal_cifsd_for_reconnect+0x134/0x200
but task is already holding lock:
ffff888119c64330 (&ret_buf->chan_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: cifs_signal_cifsd_for_reconnect+0xcf/0x200
which lock already depends on the new lock.
the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
-> #2 (&ret_buf->chan_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}:
validate_chain+0x1cf/0x270
__lock_acquire+0x60e/0x780
lock_acquire.part.0+0xb4/0x1f0
_raw_spin_lock+0x2f/0x40
cifs_setup_session+0x81/0x4b0
cifs_get_smb_ses+0x771/0x900
cifs_mount_get_session+0x7e/0x170
cifs_mount+0x92/0x2d0
cifs_smb3_do_mount+0x161/0x460
smb3_get_tree+0x55/0x90
vfs_get_tree+0x46/0x180
do_new_mount+0x1b0/0x2e0
path_mount+0x6ee/0x740
do_mount+0x98/0xe0
__do_sys_mount+0x148/0x180
do_syscall_64+0xa4/0x260
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e
-> #1 (&ret_buf->ses_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}:
validate_chain+0x1cf/0x270
__lock_acquire+0x60e/0x780
lock_acquire.part.0+0xb4/0x1f0
_raw_spin_lock+0x2f/0x40
cifs_match_super+0x101/0x320
sget+0xab/0x270
cifs_smb3_do_mount+0x1e0/0x460
smb3_get_tree+0x55/0x90
vfs_get_tree+0x46/0x180
do_new_mount+0x1b0/0x2e0
path_mount+0x6ee/0x740
do_mount+0x98/0xe0
__do_sys_mount+0x148/0x180
do_syscall_64+0xa4/0x260
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e
-> #0 (&tcp_ses->srv_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}:
check_noncircular+0x95/0xc0
check_prev_add+0x115/0x2f0
validate_chain+0x1cf/0x270
__lock_acquire+0x60e/0x780
lock_acquire.part.0+0xb4/0x1f0
_raw_spin_lock+0x2f/0x40
cifs_signal_cifsd_for_reconnect+0x134/0x200
__cifs_reconnect+0x8f/0x500
cifs_handle_standard+0x112/0x280
cifs_demultiplex_thread+0x64d/0xbc0
kthread+0x2f7/0x310
ret_from_fork+0x2a/0x230
ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30
other info that might help us debug this:
Chain exists of:
&tcp_ses->srv_lock --> &ret_buf->ses_lock --> &ret_buf->chan_lock
Possible unsafe locking scenario:
CPU0 CPU1
---- ----
lock(&ret_buf->chan_lock);
lock(&ret_buf->ses_lock);
lock(&ret_buf->chan_lock);
lock(&tcp_ses->srv_lock);
*** DEADLOCK ***
3 locks held by cifsd/6055:
#0: ffffffff857de398 (&cifs_tcp_ses_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: cifs_signal_cifsd_for_reconnect+0x7b/0x200
#1: ffff888119c64060 (&ret_buf->ses_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: cifs_signal_cifsd_for_reconnect+0x9c/0x200
#2: ffff888119c64330 (&ret_buf->chan_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: cifs_signal_cifsd_for_reconnect+0xcf/0x200
Cc: linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org
Reported-by: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Fixes: d7d7a66 ("cifs: avoid use of global locks for high contention data")
Reviewed-by: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Tested-by: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Paulo Alcantara (Red Hat) <pc@manguebit.org>
Signed-off-by: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Steve French <stfrench@microsoft.com>
0 commit comments