On Mon, 2007-09-24 at 22:13 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 06:07:38PM -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> > I'm seeing lockdep warning about a potential lock inversion between
> > &mm->mmap_sem and &inode->i_mutex in NFS (see attachment).
> >
> > Unfortunately the basis for the warning appears to be the behaviour in
> > ext3(???). AFAICS there is no way for NFS to share an inode->i_mutex
> > with ext3. What to do?
>
> Actually this can probably happen just on NFS alone.
>
> >
> > Trond
>
> > =======================================================
> > [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
> > 2.6.23-rc7-g8809e921 #1
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> > beagle-build-in/24375 is trying to acquire lock:
> > (&mm->mmap_sem){----}, at: [<c05a2887>] do_page_fault+0x17d/0x591
> >
> > but task is already holding lock:
> > (&inode->i_mutex){--..}, at: [<c059f9e3>] mutex_lock+0x1c/0x1f
> >
> > which lock already depends on the new lock.
> >
> >
> > the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
> >
> > -> #1 (&inode->i_mutex){--..}:
> > [<c043d4da>] __lock_acquire+0x9f3/0xba6
> > [<c043da62>] lock_acquire+0x5f/0x78
> > [<c059f832>] __mutex_lock_slowpath+0xe5/0x27a
> > [<c059f9e3>] mutex_lock+0x1c/0x1f
> > [<f8c92495>] nfs_revalidate_mapping+0x64/0x9c [nfs]
> > [<f8c8ff2a>] nfs_file_mmap+0x46/0x75 [nfs]
> > [<c046097c>] mmap_region+0x1ea/0x3b8
> > [<c0460e9b>] do_mmap_pgoff+0x27b/0x2da
> > [<c0407d77>] sys_mmap2+0x9b/0xb5
> > [<c040405e>] sysenter_past_esp+0x5f/0x99
> > [<ffffffff>] 0xffffffff
> >
> > -> #0 (&mm->mmap_sem){----}:
> > [<c043d3c6>] __lock_acquire+0x8df/0xba6
> > [<c043da62>] lock_acquire+0x5f/0x78
> > [<c04360db>] down_read+0x3a/0x4c
> > [<c05a2887>] do_page_fault+0x17d/0x591
> > [<c05a1382>] error_code+0x72/0x78
> > [<f88acaac>] call_filldir+0xac/0xc3 [ext3]
> > [<f88acdb2>] ext3_readdir+0x217/0x5e5 [ext3]
> > [<c04798a1>] vfs_readdir+0x67/0x93
> > [<c0479af6>] sys_getdents+0x5f/0x9d
> > [<c040405e>] sysenter_past_esp+0x5f/0x99
> > [<ffffffff>] 0xffffffff
>
> The circular lock seems to be this:
>
> #1:
>
> sys_mmap2: down_write(&mm->mmap_sem);
> nfs_revalidate_mapping: mutex_lock(&inode->i_mutex);
>
>
> #0:
>
> vfs_readdir: mutex_lock(&inode->i_mutex);
> - during the readdir (filldir64), we take a user fault (missing page?)
> and call do_page_fault -
> do_page_fault: down_read(&mm->mmap_sem);
>
>
> So it does indeed look like a circular locking. Now the question is, "is
> this a bug?". Looking like the inode of #1 must be a file or something
> else that you can mmap and the inode of #0 seems it must be a directory.
> I would say "no".
>
> Now if you can readdir on a file or mmap a directory, then this could be
> an issue.
>
> Otherwise, I'd love to see someone teach lockdep about this issue! ;-)
Christoph,
does Steve's story make sense?
If so, do we know at alloc_inode() time what type of inode we're
requesting; file or dir. Again, if so, the lockdep annotation should be
trivial in the light of the recently merged patch:
+ lockdep-give-each-filesystem-its-own-inode-lock-class.patch
All that would need to be done is add an extra lock_class_key to
file_system_type for i_mutex_dir_key, and extend alloc_inode to say
something like:
if (dir)
lockdep_set_class(&inode->i_mutex, &sb->s_type->i_mutex_dir_key);
else
lockdep_set_class(&inode->i_mutex, &sb->s_type->i_mutex_key);
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
