From: Josef Bacik josef@toxicpanda.com
commit 7837fa88704a66257404bb14144c9e4ab631a28a upstream.
Dave reported a problem with my rwsem conversion patch where we got the following lockdep splat:
====================================================== WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected 5.9.0-default+ #1297 Not tainted ------------------------------------------------------ kswapd0/76 is trying to acquire lock: ffff9d5d25df2530 (&delayed_node->mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: __btrfs_release_delayed_node.part.0+0x3f/0x320 [btrfs]
but task is already holding lock: ffffffffa40cbba0 (fs_reclaim){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: __fs_reclaim_acquire+0x5/0x30
which lock already depends on the new lock.
the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
-> #4 (fs_reclaim){+.+.}-{0:0}: __lock_acquire+0x582/0xac0 lock_acquire+0xca/0x430 fs_reclaim_acquire.part.0+0x25/0x30 kmem_cache_alloc+0x30/0x9c0 alloc_inode+0x81/0x90 iget_locked+0xcd/0x1a0 kernfs_get_inode+0x1b/0x130 kernfs_get_tree+0x136/0x210 sysfs_get_tree+0x1a/0x50 vfs_get_tree+0x1d/0xb0 path_mount+0x70f/0xa80 do_mount+0x75/0x90 __x64_sys_mount+0x8e/0xd0 do_syscall_64+0x2d/0x70 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
-> #3 (kernfs_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}: __lock_acquire+0x582/0xac0 lock_acquire+0xca/0x430 __mutex_lock+0xa0/0xaf0 kernfs_add_one+0x23/0x150 kernfs_create_dir_ns+0x58/0x80 sysfs_create_dir_ns+0x70/0xd0 kobject_add_internal+0xbb/0x2d0 kobject_add+0x7a/0xd0 btrfs_sysfs_add_block_group_type+0x141/0x1d0 [btrfs] btrfs_read_block_groups+0x1f1/0x8c0 [btrfs] open_ctree+0x981/0x1108 [btrfs] btrfs_mount_root.cold+0xe/0xb0 [btrfs] legacy_get_tree+0x2d/0x60 vfs_get_tree+0x1d/0xb0 fc_mount+0xe/0x40 vfs_kern_mount.part.0+0x71/0x90 btrfs_mount+0x13b/0x3e0 [btrfs] legacy_get_tree+0x2d/0x60 vfs_get_tree+0x1d/0xb0 path_mount+0x70f/0xa80 do_mount+0x75/0x90 __x64_sys_mount+0x8e/0xd0 do_syscall_64+0x2d/0x70 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
-> #2 (btrfs-extent-00){++++}-{3:3}: __lock_acquire+0x582/0xac0 lock_acquire+0xca/0x430 down_read_nested+0x45/0x220 __btrfs_tree_read_lock+0x35/0x1c0 [btrfs] __btrfs_read_lock_root_node+0x3a/0x50 [btrfs] btrfs_search_slot+0x6d4/0xfd0 [btrfs] check_committed_ref+0x69/0x200 [btrfs] btrfs_cross_ref_exist+0x65/0xb0 [btrfs] run_delalloc_nocow+0x446/0x9b0 [btrfs] btrfs_run_delalloc_range+0x61/0x6a0 [btrfs] writepage_delalloc+0xae/0x160 [btrfs] __extent_writepage+0x262/0x420 [btrfs] extent_write_cache_pages+0x2b6/0x510 [btrfs] extent_writepages+0x43/0x90 [btrfs] do_writepages+0x40/0xe0 __writeback_single_inode+0x62/0x610 writeback_sb_inodes+0x20f/0x500 wb_writeback+0xef/0x4a0 wb_do_writeback+0x49/0x2e0 wb_workfn+0x81/0x340 process_one_work+0x233/0x5d0 worker_thread+0x50/0x3b0 kthread+0x137/0x150 ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30
-> #1 (btrfs-fs-00){++++}-{3:3}: __lock_acquire+0x582/0xac0 lock_acquire+0xca/0x430 down_read_nested+0x45/0x220 __btrfs_tree_read_lock+0x35/0x1c0 [btrfs] __btrfs_read_lock_root_node+0x3a/0x50 [btrfs] btrfs_search_slot+0x6d4/0xfd0 [btrfs] btrfs_lookup_inode+0x3a/0xc0 [btrfs] __btrfs_update_delayed_inode+0x93/0x2c0 [btrfs] __btrfs_commit_inode_delayed_items+0x7de/0x850 [btrfs] __btrfs_run_delayed_items+0x8e/0x140 [btrfs] btrfs_commit_transaction+0x367/0xbc0 [btrfs] btrfs_mksubvol+0x2db/0x470 [btrfs] btrfs_mksnapshot+0x7b/0xb0 [btrfs] __btrfs_ioctl_snap_create+0x16f/0x1a0 [btrfs] btrfs_ioctl_snap_create_v2+0xb0/0xf0 [btrfs] btrfs_ioctl+0xd0b/0x2690 [btrfs] __x64_sys_ioctl+0x6f/0xa0 do_syscall_64+0x2d/0x70 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
-> #0 (&delayed_node->mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}: check_prev_add+0x91/0xc60 validate_chain+0xa6e/0x2a20 __lock_acquire+0x582/0xac0 lock_acquire+0xca/0x430 __mutex_lock+0xa0/0xaf0 __btrfs_release_delayed_node.part.0+0x3f/0x320 [btrfs] btrfs_evict_inode+0x3cc/0x560 [btrfs] evict+0xd6/0x1c0 dispose_list+0x48/0x70 prune_icache_sb+0x54/0x80 super_cache_scan+0x121/0x1a0 do_shrink_slab+0x16d/0x3b0 shrink_slab+0xb1/0x2e0 shrink_node+0x230/0x6a0 balance_pgdat+0x325/0x750 kswapd+0x206/0x4d0 kthread+0x137/0x150 ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30
other info that might help us debug this:
Chain exists of: &delayed_node->mutex --> kernfs_mutex --> fs_reclaim
Possible unsafe locking scenario:
CPU0 CPU1 ---- ---- lock(fs_reclaim); lock(kernfs_mutex); lock(fs_reclaim); lock(&delayed_node->mutex);
*** DEADLOCK ***
3 locks held by kswapd0/76: #0: ffffffffa40cbba0 (fs_reclaim){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: __fs_reclaim_acquire+0x5/0x30 #1: ffffffffa40b8b58 (shrinker_rwsem){++++}-{3:3}, at: shrink_slab+0x54/0x2e0 #2: ffff9d5d322390e8 (&type->s_umount_key#26){++++}-{3:3}, at: trylock_super+0x16/0x50
stack backtrace: CPU: 2 PID: 76 Comm: kswapd0 Not tainted 5.9.0-default+ #1297 Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS rel-1.12.0-59-gc9ba527-rebuilt.opensuse.org 04/01/2014 Call Trace: dump_stack+0x77/0x97 check_noncircular+0xff/0x110 ? save_trace+0x50/0x470 check_prev_add+0x91/0xc60 validate_chain+0xa6e/0x2a20 ? save_trace+0x50/0x470 __lock_acquire+0x582/0xac0 lock_acquire+0xca/0x430 ? __btrfs_release_delayed_node.part.0+0x3f/0x320 [btrfs] __mutex_lock+0xa0/0xaf0 ? __btrfs_release_delayed_node.part.0+0x3f/0x320 [btrfs] ? __lock_acquire+0x582/0xac0 ? __btrfs_release_delayed_node.part.0+0x3f/0x320 [btrfs] ? btrfs_evict_inode+0x30b/0x560 [btrfs] ? __btrfs_release_delayed_node.part.0+0x3f/0x320 [btrfs] __btrfs_release_delayed_node.part.0+0x3f/0x320 [btrfs] btrfs_evict_inode+0x3cc/0x560 [btrfs] evict+0xd6/0x1c0 dispose_list+0x48/0x70 prune_icache_sb+0x54/0x80 super_cache_scan+0x121/0x1a0 do_shrink_slab+0x16d/0x3b0 shrink_slab+0xb1/0x2e0 shrink_node+0x230/0x6a0 balance_pgdat+0x325/0x750 kswapd+0x206/0x4d0 ? finish_wait+0x90/0x90 ? balance_pgdat+0x750/0x750 kthread+0x137/0x150 ? kthread_mod_delayed_work+0xc0/0xc0 ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30
This happens because we are still holding the path open when we start adding the sysfs files for the block groups, which creates a dependency on fs_reclaim via the tree lock. Fix this by dropping the path before we start doing anything with sysfs.
Reported-by: David Sterba dsterba@suse.com CC: stable@vger.kernel.org # 5.8+ Reviewed-by: Anand Jain anand.jain@oracle.com Reviewed-by: Filipe Manana fdmanana@suse.com Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik josef@toxicpanda.com Reviewed-by: David Sterba dsterba@suse.com Signed-off-by: David Sterba dsterba@suse.com Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman gregkh@linuxfoundation.org
--- fs/btrfs/block-group.c | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
--- a/fs/btrfs/block-group.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/block-group.c @@ -2034,6 +2034,7 @@ int btrfs_read_block_groups(struct btrfs key.offset = 0; btrfs_release_path(path); } + btrfs_release_path(path);
rcu_read_lock(); list_for_each_entry_rcu(space_info, &info->space_info, list) {