From patchwork Tue Dec 8 16:23:10 2020 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Josef Bacik X-Patchwork-Id: 11958897 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-16.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_GIT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A03FAC19437 for ; Tue, 8 Dec 2020 16:25:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D57823A75 for ; Tue, 8 Dec 2020 16:25:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730157AbgLHQYv (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Dec 2020 11:24:51 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:55398 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1730144AbgLHQYt (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Dec 2020 11:24:49 -0500 Received: from mail-qk1-x744.google.com (mail-qk1-x744.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::744]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6D353C061794 for ; Tue, 8 Dec 2020 08:24:09 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qk1-x744.google.com with SMTP id z188so16421725qke.9 for ; Tue, 08 Dec 2020 08:24:09 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=toxicpanda-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=3MBAVyNUqf/0LMFLeiGY+TpoYSaKveLLXpRtIg0JpiI=; b=egdYZHRJk9WNe5kc1p1Bsn8j7Ib1oBep0v14CKbEV2hFMNRo8e39+M+MAPQCzk4YDa /hMakPIdDIhZEylnmIxfVmnYKCOV47z/o2h8TO/+X/u39/SGVlbUwVIjlGvwaTWcj7SW bgeAgdvWI/Ct13bpAY/W1mTP0PJSTJo6RzOlzxieApuXKl2WWE3B3Ox/AmdTc/HLXNH9 Aa8jLbUovufJIhc97xlMLm0BZMdguv/XfvyUUe1tlxNPG5P+g54rmCzdv9GBV3WIo7Dv 0QBf5DBDVfB9+tWMmUOJ1nIjnY2uXTaS8Ur1IQz5GccTVbVu4d1PR4kyP/BT5piRTIMj 1HFg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=3MBAVyNUqf/0LMFLeiGY+TpoYSaKveLLXpRtIg0JpiI=; b=Edj/6ujSiTIgDRRHMOrC9si3RtQ68VwiyMyurJAVsjIRP/Xw+iRP7bJKdNPNpSEMdz mZY3HmqMDGmtm//HraGqoPQh66i68WeZqt9gNuJcv25+Xz/LFPk3659TUCYMfSHqMXi8 bwNXmiL2k9rXOFEkQyxm8R2ocNIZ+IYXoU7Oa35cYSeASKcRY4fkGZyc91whcRlgwGa5 lY4vIMw1wlY7r+QEpi+JKdwUJbTze3BSlOMxal+0Zf7dVrnh4ONAhS0G/T8HXFRiN4Nu 8YtKS4aBozfpyw94Smh+7vxxeLOxXLTbKsXwoRDNSAm0MFDQaV5DsYUI8UYKC/2f4opf AoWw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530se9YdT6clGkGzQuN/nkxnXT/qQOrNey0GvcgydjqKsuYVccmx TU26pgN8m6bNMIe/2NdDDQXiqTbGEVXWq4U2 X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxk6CyPZefzxnytVL77hdk2iYFKZQB8Hs+BMrF1DHEWWIMYPXY5CwQVYpGeCXo5nbmdKZiYfQ== X-Received: by 2002:a37:6697:: with SMTP id a145mr29807391qkc.296.1607444647969; Tue, 08 Dec 2020 08:24:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (cpe-174-109-172-136.nc.res.rr.com. [174.109.172.136]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u72sm15225753qka.15.2020.12.08.08.24.06 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 08 Dec 2020 08:24:07 -0800 (PST) From: Josef Bacik To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@fb.com Cc: Qu Wenruo , Johannes Thumshirn Subject: [PATCH v6 03/52] btrfs: fix lockdep splat in btrfs_recover_relocation Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2020 11:23:10 -0500 Message-Id: <921347f2c777c0e213cb80cb00c6c3487c2f4907.1607444471.git.josef@toxicpanda.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.26.2 In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org While testing the error paths of relocation I hit the following lockdep splat ====================================================== WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected 5.10.0-rc6+ #217 Not tainted ------------------------------------------------------ mount/779 is trying to acquire lock: ffffa0e676945418 (&fs_info->balance_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: btrfs_recover_balance+0x2f0/0x340 but task is already holding lock: ffffa0e60ee31da8 (btrfs-root-00){++++}-{3:3}, at: __btrfs_tree_read_lock+0x27/0x100 which lock already depends on the new lock. the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is: -> #2 (btrfs-root-00){++++}-{3:3}: down_read_nested+0x43/0x130 __btrfs_tree_read_lock+0x27/0x100 btrfs_read_lock_root_node+0x31/0x40 btrfs_search_slot+0x462/0x8f0 btrfs_update_root+0x55/0x2b0 btrfs_drop_snapshot+0x398/0x750 clean_dirty_subvols+0xdf/0x120 btrfs_recover_relocation+0x534/0x5a0 btrfs_start_pre_rw_mount+0xcb/0x170 open_ctree+0x151f/0x1726 btrfs_mount_root.cold+0x12/0xea legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x50 vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0 vfs_kern_mount.part.0+0x71/0xb0 btrfs_mount+0x10d/0x380 legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x50 vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0 path_mount+0x433/0xc10 __x64_sys_mount+0xe3/0x120 do_syscall_64+0x33/0x40 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9 -> #1 (sb_internal#2){.+.+}-{0:0}: start_transaction+0x444/0x700 insert_balance_item.isra.0+0x37/0x320 btrfs_balance+0x354/0xf40 btrfs_ioctl_balance+0x2cf/0x380 __x64_sys_ioctl+0x83/0xb0 do_syscall_64+0x33/0x40 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9 -> #0 (&fs_info->balance_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}: __lock_acquire+0x1120/0x1e10 lock_acquire+0x116/0x370 __mutex_lock+0x7e/0x7b0 btrfs_recover_balance+0x2f0/0x340 open_ctree+0x1095/0x1726 btrfs_mount_root.cold+0x12/0xea legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x50 vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0 vfs_kern_mount.part.0+0x71/0xb0 btrfs_mount+0x10d/0x380 legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x50 vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0 path_mount+0x433/0xc10 __x64_sys_mount+0xe3/0x120 do_syscall_64+0x33/0x40 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9 other info that might help us debug this: Chain exists of: &fs_info->balance_mutex --> sb_internal#2 --> btrfs-root-00 Possible unsafe locking scenario: CPU0 CPU1 ---- ---- lock(btrfs-root-00); lock(sb_internal#2); lock(btrfs-root-00); lock(&fs_info->balance_mutex); *** DEADLOCK *** 2 locks held by mount/779: #0: ffffa0e60dc040e0 (&type->s_umount_key#47/1){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: alloc_super+0xb5/0x380 #1: ffffa0e60ee31da8 (btrfs-root-00){++++}-{3:3}, at: __btrfs_tree_read_lock+0x27/0x100 stack backtrace: CPU: 0 PID: 779 Comm: mount Not tainted 5.10.0-rc6+ #217 Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 1.13.0-2.fc32 04/01/2014 Call Trace: dump_stack+0x8b/0xb0 check_noncircular+0xcf/0xf0 ? trace_call_bpf+0x139/0x260 __lock_acquire+0x1120/0x1e10 lock_acquire+0x116/0x370 ? btrfs_recover_balance+0x2f0/0x340 __mutex_lock+0x7e/0x7b0 ? btrfs_recover_balance+0x2f0/0x340 ? btrfs_recover_balance+0x2f0/0x340 ? rcu_read_lock_sched_held+0x3f/0x80 ? kmem_cache_alloc_trace+0x2c4/0x2f0 ? btrfs_get_64+0x5e/0x100 btrfs_recover_balance+0x2f0/0x340 open_ctree+0x1095/0x1726 btrfs_mount_root.cold+0x12/0xea ? rcu_read_lock_sched_held+0x3f/0x80 legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x50 vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0 vfs_kern_mount.part.0+0x71/0xb0 btrfs_mount+0x10d/0x380 ? __kmalloc_track_caller+0x2f2/0x320 legacy_get_tree+0x30/0x50 vfs_get_tree+0x28/0xc0 ? capable+0x3a/0x60 path_mount+0x433/0xc10 __x64_sys_mount+0xe3/0x120 do_syscall_64+0x33/0x40 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9 This is thankfully straightforward to fix, simply release the path before we setup the reloc_ctl. Reviewed-by: Qu Wenruo Reviewed-by: Johannes Thumshirn Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik --- fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) diff --git a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c index 7930e1c78c45..49ba941f0314 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/volumes.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/volumes.c @@ -4318,6 +4318,8 @@ int btrfs_recover_balance(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info) btrfs_warn(fs_info, "balance: cannot set exclusive op status, resume manually"); + btrfs_release_path(path); + mutex_lock(&fs_info->balance_mutex); BUG_ON(fs_info->balance_ctl); spin_lock(&fs_info->balance_lock);