On Sat, May 12, 2018 at 09:46:25AM +0200, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 8:33 PM, Andrei Vagin <ava...@virtuozzo.com> wrote:
> > On Sat, May 05, 2018 at 10:59:02AM -0700, syzbot wrote:
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> syzbot found the following crash on:
> >>
> >> HEAD commit: c1c07416cdd4 Merge tag 'kbuild-fixes-v4.17' of
> >> git://git.k..
> >> git tree: upstream
> >> console output: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/log.txt?x=12164c97800000
> >> kernel config: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/.config?x=5a1dc06635c10d27
> >> dashboard link:
> >> https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=c1872be62e587eae9669
> >> compiler: gcc (GCC) 8.0.1 20180413 (experimental)
> >> userspace arch: i386
> >>
> >> Unfortunately, I don't have any reproducer for this crash yet.
> >>
> >> IMPORTANT: if you fix the bug, please add the following tag to the commit:
> >> Reported-by: syzbot+c1872be62e587eae9...@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
> >>
> >>
> >> ======================================================
> >> WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
> >> 4.17.0-rc3+ #59 Not tainted
> >> ------------------------------------------------------
> >> syz-executor1/25282 is trying to acquire lock:
> >> 000000004fddf743 (&(&u->lock)->rlock/1){+.+.}, at: sk_diag_dump_icons
> >> net/unix/diag.c:82 [inline]
> >> 000000004fddf743 (&(&u->lock)->rlock/1){+.+.}, at:
> >> sk_diag_fill.isra.5+0xa43/0x10d0 net/unix/diag.c:144
> >>
> >> but task is already holding lock:
> >> 00000000b6895645 (rlock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}, at: spin_lock
> >> include/linux/spinlock.h:310 [inline]
> >> 00000000b6895645 (rlock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}, at: sk_diag_dump_icons
> >> net/unix/diag.c:64 [inline]
> >> 00000000b6895645 (rlock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}, at:
> >> sk_diag_fill.isra.5+0x94e/0x10d0
> >> net/unix/diag.c:144
> >>
> >> which lock already depends on the new lock.
> >
> > In the code, we have a comment which explains why it is safe to take this
> > lock
> >
> > /*
> > * The state lock is outer for the same sk's
> > * queue lock. With the other's queue locked it's
> > * OK to lock the state.
> > */
> > unix_state_lock_nested(req);
> >
> > It is a question how to explain this to lockdep.
>
> Do I understand it correctly that (&u->lock)->rlock associated with
> AF_UNIX is locked under rlock-AF_UNIX, and then rlock-AF_UNIX is
> locked under (&u->lock)->rlock associated with AF_NETLINK? If so, I
> think we need to split (&u->lock)->rlock by family too, so that we
> have u->lock-AF_UNIX and u->lock-AF_NETLINK.
I think here is another problem. lockdep woried about
sk->sk_receive_queue vs unix_sk(s)->lock.
sk_diag_dump_icons() takes sk->sk_receive_queue and then
unix_sk(s)->lock.
unix_dgram_sendmsg takes unix_sk(sk)->lock and then sk->sk_receive_queue.
sk_diag_dump_icons() takes locks for two different sockets, but
unix_dgram_sendmsg() takes locks for one socket.
sk_diag_dump_icons
if (sk->sk_state == TCP_LISTEN) {
spin_lock(&sk->sk_receive_queue.lock);
skb_queue_walk(&sk->sk_receive_queue, skb) {
unix_state_lock_nested(req);
spin_lock_nested(&unix_sk(s)->lock,
unix_dgram_sendmsg
unix_state_lock(other)
spin_lock(&unix_sk(s)->lock)
skb_queue_tail(&other->sk_receive_queue, skb);
spin_lock_irqsave(&list->lock, flags);
>
>
>
> >> the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
> >>
> >> -> #1 (rlock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}:
> >> __raw_spin_lock_irqsave include/linux/spinlock_api_smp.h:110
> >> [inline]
> >> _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x96/0xc0 kernel/locking/spinlock.c:152
> >> skb_queue_tail+0x26/0x150 net/core/skbuff.c:2900
> >> unix_dgram_sendmsg+0xf77/0x1730 net/unix/af_unix.c:1797
> >> sock_sendmsg_nosec net/socket.c:629 [inline]
> >> sock_sendmsg+0xd5/0x120 net/socket.c:639
> >> ___sys_sendmsg+0x525/0x940 net/socket.c:2117
> >> __sys_sendmmsg+0x3bb/0x6f0 net/socket.c:2205
> >> __compat_sys_sendmmsg net/compat.c:770 [inline]
> >> __do_compat_sys_sendmmsg net/compat.c:777 [inline]
> >> __se_compat_sys_sendmmsg net/compat.c:774 [inline]
> >> __ia32_compat_sys_sendmmsg+0x9f/0x100 net/compat.c:774
> >> do_syscall_32_irqs_on arch/x86/entry/common.c:323 [inline]
> >> do_fast_syscall_32+0x345/0xf9b arch/x86/entry/common.c:394
> >> entry_SYSENTER_compat+0x70/0x7f arch/x86/entry/entry_64_compat.S:139
> >>
> >> -> #0 (&(&u->lock)->rlock/1){+.+.}:
> >> lock_acquire+0x1dc/0x520 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3920
> >> _raw_spin_lock_nested+0x28/0x40 kernel/locking/spinlock.c:354
> >> sk_diag_dump_icons net/unix/diag.c:82 [inline]
> >> sk_diag_fill.isra.5+0xa43/0x10d0 net/unix/diag.c:144
> >> sk_diag_dump net/unix/diag.c:178 [inline]
> >> unix_diag_dump+0x35f/0x550 net/unix/diag.c:206
> >> netlink_dump+0x507/0xd20 net/netlink/af_netlink.c:2226
> >> __netlink_dump_start+0x51a/0x780 net/netlink/af_netlink.c:2323
> >> netlink_dump_start include/linux/netlink.h:214 [inline]
> >> unix_diag_handler_dump+0x3f4/0x7b0 net/unix/diag.c:307
> >> __sock_diag_cmd net/core/sock_diag.c:230 [inline]
> >> sock_diag_rcv_msg+0x2e0/0x3d0 net/core/sock_diag.c:261
> >> netlink_rcv_skb+0x172/0x440 net/netlink/af_netlink.c:2448
> >> sock_diag_rcv+0x2a/0x40 net/core/sock_diag.c:272
> >> netlink_unicast_kernel net/netlink/af_netlink.c:1310 [inline]
> >> netlink_unicast+0x58b/0x740 net/netlink/af_netlink.c:1336
> >> netlink_sendmsg+0x9f0/0xfa0 net/netlink/af_netlink.c:1901
> >> sock_sendmsg_nosec net/socket.c:629 [inline]
> >> sock_sendmsg+0xd5/0x120 net/socket.c:639
> >> sock_write_iter+0x35a/0x5a0 net/socket.c:908
> >> call_write_iter include/linux/fs.h:1784 [inline]
> >> new_sync_write fs/read_write.c:474 [inline]
> >> __vfs_write+0x64d/0x960 fs/read_write.c:487
> >> vfs_write+0x1f8/0x560 fs/read_write.c:549
> >> ksys_write+0xf9/0x250 fs/read_write.c:598
> >> __do_sys_write fs/read_write.c:610 [inline]
> >> __se_sys_write fs/read_write.c:607 [inline]
> >> __ia32_sys_write+0x71/0xb0 fs/read_write.c:607
> >> do_syscall_32_irqs_on arch/x86/entry/common.c:323 [inline]
> >> do_fast_syscall_32+0x345/0xf9b arch/x86/entry/common.c:394
> >> entry_SYSENTER_compat+0x70/0x7f arch/x86/entry/entry_64_compat.S:139
> >>
> >> other info that might help us debug this:
> >>
> >> Possible unsafe locking scenario:
> >>
> >> CPU0 CPU1
> >> ---- ----
> >> lock(rlock-AF_UNIX);
> >> lock(&(&u->lock)->rlock/1);
> >> lock(rlock-AF_UNIX);
> >> lock(&(&u->lock)->rlock/1);
> >>
> >> *** DEADLOCK ***
> >>
> >> 5 locks held by syz-executor1/25282:
> >> #0: 000000003919e1bd (sock_diag_mutex){+.+.}, at: sock_diag_rcv+0x1b/0x40
> >> net/core/sock_diag.c:271
> >> #1: 000000004f328d3e (sock_diag_table_mutex){+.+.}, at: __sock_diag_cmd
> >> net/core/sock_diag.c:225 [inline]
> >> #1: 000000004f328d3e (sock_diag_table_mutex){+.+.}, at:
> >> sock_diag_rcv_msg+0x169/0x3d0 net/core/sock_diag.c:261
> >> #2: 000000004cc04dbb (nlk_cb_mutex-SOCK_DIAG){+.+.}, at:
> >> netlink_dump+0x98/0xd20 net/netlink/af_netlink.c:2182
> >> #3: 00000000accdef41 (unix_table_lock){+.+.}, at: spin_lock
> >> include/linux/spinlock.h:310 [inline]
> >> #3: 00000000accdef41 (unix_table_lock){+.+.}, at:
> >> unix_diag_dump+0x10a/0x550 net/unix/diag.c:192
> >> #4: 00000000b6895645 (rlock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}, at: spin_lock
> >> include/linux/spinlock.h:310 [inline]
> >> #4: 00000000b6895645 (rlock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}, at: sk_diag_dump_icons
> >> net/unix/diag.c:64 [inline]
> >> #4: 00000000b6895645 (rlock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}, at:
> >> sk_diag_fill.isra.5+0x94e/0x10d0 net/unix/diag.c:144
> >>
> >> stack backtrace:
> >> CPU: 1 PID: 25282 Comm: syz-executor1 Not tainted 4.17.0-rc3+ #59
> >> Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS
> >> Google 01/01/2011
> >> Call Trace:
> >> __dump_stack lib/dump_stack.c:77 [inline]
> >> dump_stack+0x1b9/0x294 lib/dump_stack.c:113
> >> print_circular_bug.isra.36.cold.54+0x1bd/0x27d
> >> kernel/locking/lockdep.c:1223
> >> check_prev_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:1863 [inline]
> >> check_prevs_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:1976 [inline]
> >> validate_chain kernel/locking/lockdep.c:2417 [inline]
> >> __lock_acquire+0x343e/0x5140 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3431
> >> lock_acquire+0x1dc/0x520 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3920
> >> _raw_spin_lock_nested+0x28/0x40 kernel/locking/spinlock.c:354
> >> sk_diag_dump_icons net/unix/diag.c:82 [inline]
> >> sk_diag_fill.isra.5+0xa43/0x10d0 net/unix/diag.c:144
> >> sk_diag_dump net/unix/diag.c:178 [inline]
> >> unix_diag_dump+0x35f/0x550 net/unix/diag.c:206
> >> netlink_dump+0x507/0xd20 net/netlink/af_netlink.c:2226
> >> __netlink_dump_start+0x51a/0x780 net/netlink/af_netlink.c:2323
> >> netlink_dump_start include/linux/netlink.h:214 [inline]
> >> unix_diag_handler_dump+0x3f4/0x7b0 net/unix/diag.c:307
> >> __sock_diag_cmd net/core/sock_diag.c:230 [inline]
> >> sock_diag_rcv_msg+0x2e0/0x3d0 net/core/sock_diag.c:261
> >> netlink_rcv_skb+0x172/0x440 net/netlink/af_netlink.c:2448
> >> sock_diag_rcv+0x2a/0x40 net/core/sock_diag.c:272
> >> netlink_unicast_kernel net/netlink/af_netlink.c:1310 [inline]
> >> netlink_unicast+0x58b/0x740 net/netlink/af_netlink.c:1336
> >> netlink_sendmsg+0x9f0/0xfa0 net/netlink/af_netlink.c:1901
> >> sock_sendmsg_nosec net/socket.c:629 [inline]
> >> sock_sendmsg+0xd5/0x120 net/socket.c:639
> >> sock_write_iter+0x35a/0x5a0 net/socket.c:908
> >> call_write_iter include/linux/fs.h:1784 [inline]
> >> new_sync_write fs/read_write.c:474 [inline]
> >> __vfs_write+0x64d/0x960 fs/read_write.c:487
> >> vfs_write+0x1f8/0x560 fs/read_write.c:549
> >> ksys_write+0xf9/0x250 fs/read_write.c:598
> >> __do_sys_write fs/read_write.c:610 [inline]
> >> __se_sys_write fs/read_write.c:607 [inline]
> >> __ia32_sys_write+0x71/0xb0 fs/read_write.c:607
> >> do_syscall_32_irqs_on arch/x86/entry/common.c:323 [inline]
> >> do_fast_syscall_32+0x345/0xf9b arch/x86/entry/common.c:394
> >> entry_SYSENTER_compat+0x70/0x7f arch/x86/entry/entry_64_compat.S:139
> >> RIP: 0023:0xf7f8ccb9
> >> RSP: 002b:00000000f5f880ac EFLAGS: 00000282 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000004
> >> RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 0000000000000017 RCX: 000000002058bfe4
> >> RDX: 0000000000000029 RSI: 0000000000000000 RDI: 0000000000000000
> >> RBP: 0000000000000000 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000
> >> R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000296 R12: 0000000000000000
> >> R13: 0000000000000000 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: 0000000000000000
> >>
> >>
> >> ---
> >> This bug is generated by a bot. It may contain errors.
> >> See https://goo.gl/tpsmEJ for more information about syzbot.
> >> syzbot engineers can be reached at syzkal...@googlegroups.com.
> >>
> >> syzbot will keep track of this bug report.
> >> If you forgot to add the Reported-by tag, once the fix for this bug is
> >> merged
> >> into any tree, please reply to this email with:
> >> #syz fix: exact-commit-title
> >> To mark this as a duplicate of another syzbot report, please reply with:
> >> #syz dup: exact-subject-of-another-report
> >> If it's a one-off invalid bug report, please reply with:
> >> #syz invalid
> >> Note: if the crash happens again, it will cause creation of a new bug
> >> report.
> >> Note: all commands must start from beginning of the line in the email body.
> >
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "syzkaller-bugs" group.
> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> > email to syzkaller-bugs+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> > To view this discussion on the web visit
> > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/syzkaller-bugs/20180511183358.GA1492%40outlook.office365.com.
> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
