4.17-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Bart Van Assche bart.vanassche@wdc.com
commit 2d0b2d64d325e22939d9db3ba784f1236459ed98 upstream.
This patch avoids that lockdep reports the following:
====================================================== WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected 4.18.0-rc1 #62 Not tainted ------------------------------------------------------ kswapd0/84 is trying to acquire lock: 00000000c313516d (&xfs_nondir_ilock_class){++++}, at: xfs_free_eofblocks+0xa2/0x1e0
but task is already holding lock: 00000000591c83ae (fs_reclaim){+.+.}, at: __fs_reclaim_acquire+0x5/0x30
which lock already depends on the new lock.
the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
-> #2 (fs_reclaim){+.+.}: kmem_cache_alloc+0x2c/0x2b0 radix_tree_node_alloc.constprop.19+0x3d/0xc0 __radix_tree_create+0x161/0x1c0 __radix_tree_insert+0x45/0x210 dmz_map+0x245/0x2d0 [dm_zoned] __map_bio+0x40/0x260 __split_and_process_non_flush+0x116/0x220 __split_and_process_bio+0x81/0x180 __dm_make_request.isra.32+0x5a/0x100 generic_make_request+0x36e/0x690 submit_bio+0x6c/0x140 mpage_readpages+0x19e/0x1f0 read_pages+0x6d/0x1b0 __do_page_cache_readahead+0x21b/0x2d0 force_page_cache_readahead+0xc4/0x100 generic_file_read_iter+0x7c6/0xd20 __vfs_read+0x102/0x180 vfs_read+0x9b/0x140 ksys_read+0x55/0xc0 do_syscall_64+0x5a/0x1f0 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x49/0xbe
-> #1 (&dmz->chunk_lock){+.+.}: dmz_map+0x133/0x2d0 [dm_zoned] __map_bio+0x40/0x260 __split_and_process_non_flush+0x116/0x220 __split_and_process_bio+0x81/0x180 __dm_make_request.isra.32+0x5a/0x100 generic_make_request+0x36e/0x690 submit_bio+0x6c/0x140 _xfs_buf_ioapply+0x31c/0x590 xfs_buf_submit_wait+0x73/0x520 xfs_buf_read_map+0x134/0x2f0 xfs_trans_read_buf_map+0xc3/0x580 xfs_read_agf+0xa5/0x1e0 xfs_alloc_read_agf+0x59/0x2b0 xfs_alloc_pagf_init+0x27/0x60 xfs_bmap_longest_free_extent+0x43/0xb0 xfs_bmap_btalloc_nullfb+0x7f/0xf0 xfs_bmap_btalloc+0x428/0x7c0 xfs_bmapi_write+0x598/0xcc0 xfs_iomap_write_allocate+0x15a/0x330 xfs_map_blocks+0x1cf/0x3f0 xfs_do_writepage+0x15f/0x7b0 write_cache_pages+0x1ca/0x540 xfs_vm_writepages+0x65/0xa0 do_writepages+0x48/0xf0 __writeback_single_inode+0x58/0x730 writeback_sb_inodes+0x249/0x5c0 wb_writeback+0x11e/0x550 wb_workfn+0xa3/0x670 process_one_work+0x228/0x670 worker_thread+0x3c/0x390 kthread+0x11c/0x140 ret_from_fork+0x3a/0x50
-> #0 (&xfs_nondir_ilock_class){++++}: down_read_nested+0x43/0x70 xfs_free_eofblocks+0xa2/0x1e0 xfs_fs_destroy_inode+0xac/0x270 dispose_list+0x51/0x80 prune_icache_sb+0x52/0x70 super_cache_scan+0x127/0x1a0 shrink_slab.part.47+0x1bd/0x590 shrink_node+0x3b5/0x470 balance_pgdat+0x158/0x3b0 kswapd+0x1ba/0x600 kthread+0x11c/0x140 ret_from_fork+0x3a/0x50
other info that might help us debug this:
Chain exists of: &xfs_nondir_ilock_class --> &dmz->chunk_lock --> fs_reclaim
Possible unsafe locking scenario:
CPU0 CPU1 ---- ---- lock(fs_reclaim); lock(&dmz->chunk_lock); lock(fs_reclaim); lock(&xfs_nondir_ilock_class);
--- drivers/md/dm-zoned-target.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
--- a/drivers/md/dm-zoned-target.c +++ b/drivers/md/dm-zoned-target.c @@ -788,7 +788,7 @@ static int dmz_ctr(struct dm_target *ti,
/* Chunk BIO work */ mutex_init(&dmz->chunk_lock); - INIT_RADIX_TREE(&dmz->chunk_rxtree, GFP_KERNEL); + INIT_RADIX_TREE(&dmz->chunk_rxtree, GFP_NOIO); dmz->chunk_wq = alloc_workqueue("dmz_cwq_%s", WQ_MEM_RECLAIM | WQ_UNBOUND, 0, dev->name); if (!dmz->chunk_wq) {