UBIFS: Kill unneeded locking in ubifs_init_security

Fixes the following lockdep splat:
[    1.244527] =============================================
[    1.245193] [ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ]
[    1.245193] 4.2.0-rc1+ #37 Not tainted
[    1.245193] ---------------------------------------------
[    1.245193] cp/742 is trying to acquire lock:
[    1.245193]  (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#9){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff812b3f69>] ubifs_init_security+0x29/0xb0
[    1.245193]
[    1.245193] but task is already holding lock:
[    1.245193]  (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#9){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff81198e7f>] path_openat+0x3af/0x1280
[    1.245193]
[    1.245193] other info that might help us debug this:
[    1.245193]  Possible unsafe locking scenario:
[    1.245193]
[    1.245193]        CPU0
[    1.245193]        ----
[    1.245193]   lock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#9);
[    1.245193]   lock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#9);
[    1.245193]
[    1.245193]  *** DEADLOCK ***
[    1.245193]
[    1.245193]  May be due to missing lock nesting notation
[    1.245193]
[    1.245193] 2 locks held by cp/742:
[    1.245193]  #0:  (sb_writers#5){.+.+.+}, at: [<ffffffff811ad37f>] mnt_want_write+0x1f/0x50
[    1.245193]  #1:  (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#9){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff81198e7f>] path_openat+0x3af/0x1280
[    1.245193]
[    1.245193] stack backtrace:
[    1.245193] CPU: 2 PID: 742 Comm: cp Not tainted 4.2.0-rc1+ #37
[    1.245193] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS rel-1.7.5-0-ge51488c-20140816_022509-build35 04/01/2014
[    1.245193]  ffffffff8252d530 ffff88007b023a38 ffffffff814f6f49 ffffffff810b56c5
[    1.245193]  ffff88007c30cc80 ffff88007b023af8 ffffffff810a150d ffff88007b023a68
[    1.245193]  000000008101302a ffff880000000000 00000008f447e23f ffffffff8252d500
[    1.245193] Call Trace:
[    1.245193]  [<ffffffff814f6f49>] dump_stack+0x4c/0x65
[    1.245193]  [<ffffffff810b56c5>] ? console_unlock+0x1c5/0x510
[    1.245193]  [<ffffffff810a150d>] __lock_acquire+0x1a6d/0x1ea0
[    1.245193]  [<ffffffff8109fa78>] ? __lock_is_held+0x58/0x80
[    1.245193]  [<ffffffff810a1a93>] lock_acquire+0xd3/0x270
[    1.245193]  [<ffffffff812b3f69>] ? ubifs_init_security+0x29/0xb0
[    1.245193]  [<ffffffff814fc83b>] mutex_lock_nested+0x6b/0x3a0
[    1.245193]  [<ffffffff812b3f69>] ? ubifs_init_security+0x29/0xb0
[    1.245193]  [<ffffffff812b3f69>] ? ubifs_init_security+0x29/0xb0
[    1.245193]  [<ffffffff812b3f69>] ubifs_init_security+0x29/0xb0
[    1.245193]  [<ffffffff8128e286>] ubifs_create+0xa6/0x1f0
[    1.245193]  [<ffffffff81198e7f>] ? path_openat+0x3af/0x1280
[    1.245193]  [<ffffffff81195d15>] vfs_create+0x95/0xc0
[    1.245193]  [<ffffffff8119929c>] path_openat+0x7cc/0x1280
[    1.245193]  [<ffffffff8109ffe3>] ? __lock_acquire+0x543/0x1ea0
[    1.245193]  [<ffffffff81088f20>] ? sched_clock_cpu+0x90/0xc0
[    1.245193]  [<ffffffff81088c00>] ? calc_global_load_tick+0x60/0x90
[    1.245193]  [<ffffffff81088f20>] ? sched_clock_cpu+0x90/0xc0
[    1.245193]  [<ffffffff811a9cef>] ? __alloc_fd+0xaf/0x180
[    1.245193]  [<ffffffff8119ac55>] do_filp_open+0x75/0xd0
[    1.245193]  [<ffffffff814ffd86>] ? _raw_spin_unlock+0x26/0x40
[    1.245193]  [<ffffffff811a9cef>] ? __alloc_fd+0xaf/0x180
[    1.245193]  [<ffffffff81189bd9>] do_sys_open+0x129/0x200
[    1.245193]  [<ffffffff81189cc9>] SyS_open+0x19/0x20
[    1.245193]  [<ffffffff81500717>] entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x12/0x6f

While the lockdep splat is a false positive, becuase path_openat holds i_mutex
of the parent directory and ubifs_init_security() tries to acquire i_mutex
of a new inode, it reveals that taking i_mutex in ubifs_init_security() is
in vain because it is only being called in the inode allocation path
and therefore nobody else can see the inode yet.

Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # 3.20-
Reported-and-tested-by: NBoris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>
Reviewed-and-tested-by: NDongsheng Yang <yangds.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: NRichard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
Signed-off-by: dedekind1@gmail.com
上级 1f93e4a9
master alk-4.19.24 alk-4.19.30 alk-4.19.34 alk-4.19.36 alk-4.19.43 alk-4.19.48 alk-4.19.57 ck-4.19.67 ck-4.19.81 ck-4.19.91 github/fork/deepanshu1422/fix-typo-in-comment github/fork/haosdent/fix-typo linux-next v4.19.91 v4.19.90 v4.19.89 v4.19.88 v4.19.87 v4.19.86 v4.19.85 v4.19.84 v4.19.83 v4.19.82 v4.19.81 v4.19.80 v4.19.79 v4.19.78 v4.19.77 v4.19.76 v4.19.75 v4.19.74 v4.19.73 v4.19.72 v4.19.71 v4.19.70 v4.19.69 v4.19.68 v4.19.67 v4.19.66 v4.19.65 v4.19.64 v4.19.63 v4.19.62 v4.19.61 v4.19.60 v4.19.59 v4.19.58 v4.19.57 v4.19.56 v4.19.55 v4.19.54 v4.19.53 v4.19.52 v4.19.51 v4.19.50 v4.19.49 v4.19.48 v4.19.47 v4.19.46 v4.19.45 v4.19.44 v4.19.43 v4.19.42 v4.19.41 v4.19.40 v4.19.39 v4.19.38 v4.19.37 v4.19.36 v4.19.35 v4.19.34 v4.19.33 v4.19.32 v4.19.31 v4.19.30 v4.19.29 v4.19.28 v4.19.27 v4.19.26 v4.19.25 v4.19.24 v4.19.23 v4.19.22 v4.19.21 v4.19.20 v4.19.19 v4.19.18 v4.19.17 v4.19.16 v4.19.15 v4.19.14 v4.19.13 v4.19.12 v4.19.11 v4.19.10 v4.19.9 v4.19.8 v4.19.7 v4.19.6 v4.19.5 v4.19.4 v4.19.3 v4.19.2 v4.19.1 v4.19 v4.19-rc8 v4.19-rc7 v4.19-rc6 v4.19-rc5 v4.19-rc4 v4.19-rc3 v4.19-rc2 v4.19-rc1 ck-release-21 ck-release-20 ck-release-19.2 ck-release-19.1 ck-release-19 ck-release-18 ck-release-17.2 ck-release-17.1 ck-release-17 ck-release-16 ck-release-15.1 ck-release-15 ck-release-14 ck-release-13.2 ck-release-13 ck-release-12 ck-release-11 ck-release-10 ck-release-9 ck-release-7 alk-release-15 alk-release-14 alk-release-13.2 alk-release-13 alk-release-12 alk-release-11 alk-release-10 alk-release-9 alk-release-7
无相关合并请求
......@@ -652,11 +652,8 @@ int ubifs_init_security(struct inode *dentry, struct inode *inode,
{
int err;
mutex_lock(&inode->i_mutex);
err = security_inode_init_security(inode, dentry, qstr,
&init_xattrs, 0);
mutex_unlock(&inode->i_mutex);
if (err) {
struct ubifs_info *c = dentry->i_sb->s_fs_info;
ubifs_err(c, "cannot initialize security for inode %lu, error %d",
......
Markdown is supported
0% .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
先完成此消息的编辑!
想要评论请 注册