On Thu 16-07-20 22:41:14, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> On 2020/07/16 17:35, Michal Hocko wrote:
[...]
> > But in order for this to happen the shrinker would have to do the last
> > put on the mm. But mm cannot go away from under uprobe_mmap so those two
> > paths cannot race with each other.
>
> and mm1
On 2020/07/16 17:35, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Thu 16-07-20 08:36:52, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
>> syzbot is reporting that mmput() from shrinker function has a risk of
>> deadlock [1]. Don't start synchronous teardown of mm when called from
>> shrinker function.
>
> Please add the actual lock dependency
On Thu 16-07-20 08:36:52, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> syzbot is reporting that mmput() from shrinker function has a risk of
> deadlock [1]. Don't start synchronous teardown of mm when called from
> shrinker function.
Please add the actual lock dependency to the changelog.
Anyway is this deadlock real?
syzbot is reporting that mmput() from shrinker function has a risk of
deadlock [1]. Don't start synchronous teardown of mm when called from
shrinker function.
[1]
https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?id=bc9e7303f537c41b2b0cc2dfcea3fc42964c2d45
Reported-by: syzbot
Reported-by: syzbot
Signed-off-by
