Re: [PATCH v2] erofs: fix lockdep false positives on initializing erofs_pseudo_mnt
On 2024/3/7 22:18, Gao Xiang wrote:
On 2024/3/7 18:10, Baokun Li wrote:
Lockdep reported the following issue when mounting erofs with a
domain_id:
WARNING: possible recursive locking detected
6.8.0-rc7-xfstests #521 Not tainted
mount/396 is trying to acquire lock:
907a80e0 (>s_umount_key#50/1){+.+.}-{3:3},
at: alloc_super+0xe3/0x3d0
but task is already holding lock:
907a8aaa90e0 (>s_umount_key#50/1){+.+.}-{3:3},
at: alloc_super+0xe3/0x3d0
other info that might help us debug this:
Possible unsafe locking scenario:
CPU0
lock(>s_umount_key#50/1);
lock(>s_umount_key#50/1);
*** DEADLOCK ***
May be due to missing lock nesting notation
2 locks held by mount/396:
#0: 907a8aaa90e0 (>s_umount_key#50/1){+.+.}-{3:3},
at: alloc_super+0xe3/0x3d0
#1: c00e6f28 (erofs_domain_list_lock){+.+.}-{3:3},
at: erofs_fscache_register_fs+0x3d/0x270 [erofs]
stack backtrace:
CPU: 1 PID: 396 Comm: mount Not tainted 6.8.0-rc7-xfstests #521
Call Trace:
dump_stack_lvl+0x64/0xb0
validate_chain+0x5c4/0xa00
__lock_acquire+0x6a9/0xd50
lock_acquire+0xcd/0x2b0
down_write_nested+0x45/0xd0
alloc_super+0xe3/0x3d0
sget_fc+0x62/0x2f0
vfs_get_super+0x21/0x90
vfs_get_tree+0x2c/0xf0
fc_mount+0x12/0x40
vfs_kern_mount.part.0+0x75/0x90
kern_mount+0x24/0x40
erofs_fscache_register_fs+0x1ef/0x270 [erofs]
erofs_fc_fill_super+0x213/0x380 [erofs]
This is because the file_system_type of both erofs and the pseudo-mount
point of domain_id is erofs_fs_type, so two successive calls to
alloc_super() are considered to be using the same lock and trigger the
warning above.
Therefore add a nodev file_system_type called erofs_anon_fs_type in
fscache.c to silence this complaint. Because kern_mount() takes a
pointer to struct file_system_type, not its (string) name. So we don't
need to call register_filesystem(). In addition, call init_pseudo() in
erofs_anon_init_fs_context() as suggested by Al Viro, so that we can
remove erofs_fc_fill_pseudo_super(), erofs_fc_anon_get_tree(), and
erofs_anon_context_ops.
Signed-off-by: Baokun Li
I will add
Suggested-by: Al Viro
when applying..
Okay, thanks for adding it.
Also since it's a false positive and too close to the
final so let's keep this patch in -next for a while and
then aim for v6.9-rc1 instead.
Thanks,
Gao Xiang
Fine! Thanks!
--
With Best Regards,
Baokun Li
.
Re: [PATCH v2] erofs: fix lockdep false positives on initializing erofs_pseudo_mnt
On 2024/3/7 18:10, Baokun Li wrote:
Lockdep reported the following issue when mounting erofs with a domain_id:
WARNING: possible recursive locking detected
6.8.0-rc7-xfstests #521 Not tainted
mount/396 is trying to acquire lock:
907a80e0 (>s_umount_key#50/1){+.+.}-{3:3},
at: alloc_super+0xe3/0x3d0
but task is already holding lock:
907a8aaa90e0 (>s_umount_key#50/1){+.+.}-{3:3},
at: alloc_super+0xe3/0x3d0
other info that might help us debug this:
Possible unsafe locking scenario:
CPU0
lock(>s_umount_key#50/1);
lock(>s_umount_key#50/1);
*** DEADLOCK ***
May be due to missing lock nesting notation
2 locks held by mount/396:
#0: 907a8aaa90e0 (>s_umount_key#50/1){+.+.}-{3:3},
at: alloc_super+0xe3/0x3d0
#1: c00e6f28 (erofs_domain_list_lock){+.+.}-{3:3},
at: erofs_fscache_register_fs+0x3d/0x270 [erofs]
stack backtrace:
CPU: 1 PID: 396 Comm: mount Not tainted 6.8.0-rc7-xfstests #521
Call Trace:
dump_stack_lvl+0x64/0xb0
validate_chain+0x5c4/0xa00
__lock_acquire+0x6a9/0xd50
lock_acquire+0xcd/0x2b0
down_write_nested+0x45/0xd0
alloc_super+0xe3/0x3d0
sget_fc+0x62/0x2f0
vfs_get_super+0x21/0x90
vfs_get_tree+0x2c/0xf0
fc_mount+0x12/0x40
vfs_kern_mount.part.0+0x75/0x90
kern_mount+0x24/0x40
erofs_fscache_register_fs+0x1ef/0x270 [erofs]
erofs_fc_fill_super+0x213/0x380 [erofs]
This is because the file_system_type of both erofs and the pseudo-mount
point of domain_id is erofs_fs_type, so two successive calls to
alloc_super() are considered to be using the same lock and trigger the
warning above.
Therefore add a nodev file_system_type called erofs_anon_fs_type in
fscache.c to silence this complaint. Because kern_mount() takes a
pointer to struct file_system_type, not its (string) name. So we don't
need to call register_filesystem(). In addition, call init_pseudo() in
erofs_anon_init_fs_context() as suggested by Al Viro, so that we can
remove erofs_fc_fill_pseudo_super(), erofs_fc_anon_get_tree(), and
erofs_anon_context_ops.
Signed-off-by: Baokun Li
I will add
Suggested-by: Al Viro
when applying..
Also since it's a false positive and too close to the
final so let's keep this patch in -next for a while and
then aim for v6.9-rc1 instead.
Thanks,
Gao Xiang
Re: [PATCH v2] erofs: fix lockdep false positives on initializing erofs_pseudo_mnt
On 3/7/24 6:10 PM, Baokun Li wrote:
> Lockdep reported the following issue when mounting erofs with a domain_id:
>
>
> WARNING: possible recursive locking detected
> 6.8.0-rc7-xfstests #521 Not tainted
>
> mount/396 is trying to acquire lock:
> 907a80e0 (>s_umount_key#50/1){+.+.}-{3:3},
> at: alloc_super+0xe3/0x3d0
>
> but task is already holding lock:
> 907a8aaa90e0 (>s_umount_key#50/1){+.+.}-{3:3},
> at: alloc_super+0xe3/0x3d0
>
> other info that might help us debug this:
> Possible unsafe locking scenario:
>
>CPU0
>
> lock(>s_umount_key#50/1);
> lock(>s_umount_key#50/1);
>
> *** DEADLOCK ***
>
> May be due to missing lock nesting notation
>
> 2 locks held by mount/396:
> #0: 907a8aaa90e0 (>s_umount_key#50/1){+.+.}-{3:3},
> at: alloc_super+0xe3/0x3d0
> #1: c00e6f28 (erofs_domain_list_lock){+.+.}-{3:3},
> at: erofs_fscache_register_fs+0x3d/0x270 [erofs]
>
> stack backtrace:
> CPU: 1 PID: 396 Comm: mount Not tainted 6.8.0-rc7-xfstests #521
> Call Trace:
>
> dump_stack_lvl+0x64/0xb0
> validate_chain+0x5c4/0xa00
> __lock_acquire+0x6a9/0xd50
> lock_acquire+0xcd/0x2b0
> down_write_nested+0x45/0xd0
> alloc_super+0xe3/0x3d0
> sget_fc+0x62/0x2f0
> vfs_get_super+0x21/0x90
> vfs_get_tree+0x2c/0xf0
> fc_mount+0x12/0x40
> vfs_kern_mount.part.0+0x75/0x90
> kern_mount+0x24/0x40
> erofs_fscache_register_fs+0x1ef/0x270 [erofs]
> erofs_fc_fill_super+0x213/0x380 [erofs]
>
> This is because the file_system_type of both erofs and the pseudo-mount
> point of domain_id is erofs_fs_type, so two successive calls to
> alloc_super() are considered to be using the same lock and trigger the
> warning above.
>
> Therefore add a nodev file_system_type called erofs_anon_fs_type in
> fscache.c to silence this complaint. Because kern_mount() takes a
> pointer to struct file_system_type, not its (string) name. So we don't
> need to call register_filesystem(). In addition, call init_pseudo() in
> erofs_anon_init_fs_context() as suggested by Al Viro, so that we can
> remove erofs_fc_fill_pseudo_super(), erofs_fc_anon_get_tree(), and
> erofs_anon_context_ops.
>
> Signed-off-by: Baokun Li
LGTM.
Reviewed-and-tested-by: Jingbo Xu
> ---
> V1->V2:
> Modified as suggested by Al Viro to simplify the code.
>
> fs/erofs/fscache.c | 15 ++-
> fs/erofs/internal.h | 1 -
> fs/erofs/super.c| 30 +-
> 3 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/erofs/fscache.c b/fs/erofs/fscache.c
> index 89a7c2453aae..122a4753ecea 100644
> --- a/fs/erofs/fscache.c
> +++ b/fs/erofs/fscache.c
> @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@
> * Copyright (C) 2022, Alibaba Cloud
> * Copyright (C) 2022, Bytedance Inc. All rights reserved.
> */
> +#include
> #include
> #include "internal.h"
>
> @@ -12,6 +13,18 @@ static LIST_HEAD(erofs_domain_list);
> static LIST_HEAD(erofs_domain_cookies_list);
> static struct vfsmount *erofs_pseudo_mnt;
>
> +static int erofs_anon_init_fs_context(struct fs_context *fc)
> +{
> + return init_pseudo(fc, EROFS_SUPER_MAGIC) ? 0 : -ENOMEM;
> +}
> +
> +static struct file_system_type erofs_anon_fs_type = {
> + .owner = THIS_MODULE,
> + .name = "pseudo_erofs",
> + .init_fs_context = erofs_anon_init_fs_context,
> + .kill_sb= kill_anon_super,
> +};
> +
> struct erofs_fscache_request {
> struct erofs_fscache_request *primary;
> struct netfs_cache_resources cache_resources;
> @@ -381,7 +394,7 @@ static int erofs_fscache_init_domain(struct super_block
> *sb)
> goto out;
>
> if (!erofs_pseudo_mnt) {
> - struct vfsmount *mnt = kern_mount(_fs_type);
> + struct vfsmount *mnt = kern_mount(_anon_fs_type);
> if (IS_ERR(mnt)) {
> err = PTR_ERR(mnt);
> goto out;
> diff --git a/fs/erofs/internal.h b/fs/erofs/internal.h
> index 0f0706325b7b..701d4eec693a 100644
> --- a/fs/erofs/internal.h
> +++ b/fs/erofs/internal.h
> @@ -385,7 +385,6 @@ struct erofs_map_dev {
> unsigned int m_deviceid;
> };
>
> -extern struct file_system_type erofs_fs_type;
> extern const struct super_operations erofs_sops;
>
> extern const struct address_space_operations erofs_raw_access_aops;
> diff --git a/fs/erofs/super.c b/fs/erofs/super.c
> index 9b4b66dcdd4f..6fbb1fba2d31 100644
> --- a/fs/erofs/super.c
> +++ b/fs/erofs/super.c
> @@ -579,13 +579,6 @@ static const struct export_operations erofs_export_ops =
> {
> .get_parent = erofs_get_parent,
> };
>
> -static int erofs_fc_fill_pseudo_super(struct super_block *sb, struct
> fs_context *fc)
> -{
> - static const struct tree_descr empty_descr = {""};
> -
> - return
Re: [PATCH v2] erofs: fix lockdep false positives on initializing erofs_pseudo_mnt
LGTM
Reviewed-by: Yang Erkun
在 2024/3/7 18:10, Baokun Li 写道:
Lockdep reported the following issue when mounting erofs with a domain_id:
WARNING: possible recursive locking detected
6.8.0-rc7-xfstests #521 Not tainted
mount/396 is trying to acquire lock:
907a80e0 (>s_umount_key#50/1){+.+.}-{3:3},
at: alloc_super+0xe3/0x3d0
but task is already holding lock:
907a8aaa90e0 (>s_umount_key#50/1){+.+.}-{3:3},
at: alloc_super+0xe3/0x3d0
other info that might help us debug this:
Possible unsafe locking scenario:
CPU0
lock(>s_umount_key#50/1);
lock(>s_umount_key#50/1);
*** DEADLOCK ***
May be due to missing lock nesting notation
2 locks held by mount/396:
#0: 907a8aaa90e0 (>s_umount_key#50/1){+.+.}-{3:3},
at: alloc_super+0xe3/0x3d0
#1: c00e6f28 (erofs_domain_list_lock){+.+.}-{3:3},
at: erofs_fscache_register_fs+0x3d/0x270 [erofs]
stack backtrace:
CPU: 1 PID: 396 Comm: mount Not tainted 6.8.0-rc7-xfstests #521
Call Trace:
dump_stack_lvl+0x64/0xb0
validate_chain+0x5c4/0xa00
__lock_acquire+0x6a9/0xd50
lock_acquire+0xcd/0x2b0
down_write_nested+0x45/0xd0
alloc_super+0xe3/0x3d0
sget_fc+0x62/0x2f0
vfs_get_super+0x21/0x90
vfs_get_tree+0x2c/0xf0
fc_mount+0x12/0x40
vfs_kern_mount.part.0+0x75/0x90
kern_mount+0x24/0x40
erofs_fscache_register_fs+0x1ef/0x270 [erofs]
erofs_fc_fill_super+0x213/0x380 [erofs]
This is because the file_system_type of both erofs and the pseudo-mount
point of domain_id is erofs_fs_type, so two successive calls to
alloc_super() are considered to be using the same lock and trigger the
warning above.
Therefore add a nodev file_system_type called erofs_anon_fs_type in
fscache.c to silence this complaint. Because kern_mount() takes a
pointer to struct file_system_type, not its (string) name. So we don't
need to call register_filesystem(). In addition, call init_pseudo() in
erofs_anon_init_fs_context() as suggested by Al Viro, so that we can
remove erofs_fc_fill_pseudo_super(), erofs_fc_anon_get_tree(), and
erofs_anon_context_ops.
Signed-off-by: Baokun Li
---
V1->V2:
Modified as suggested by Al Viro to simplify the code.
fs/erofs/fscache.c | 15 ++-
fs/erofs/internal.h | 1 -
fs/erofs/super.c| 30 +-
3 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/erofs/fscache.c b/fs/erofs/fscache.c
index 89a7c2453aae..122a4753ecea 100644
--- a/fs/erofs/fscache.c
+++ b/fs/erofs/fscache.c
@@ -3,6 +3,7 @@
* Copyright (C) 2022, Alibaba Cloud
* Copyright (C) 2022, Bytedance Inc. All rights reserved.
*/
+#include
#include
#include "internal.h"
@@ -12,6 +13,18 @@ static LIST_HEAD(erofs_domain_list);
static LIST_HEAD(erofs_domain_cookies_list);
static struct vfsmount *erofs_pseudo_mnt;
+static int erofs_anon_init_fs_context(struct fs_context *fc)
+{
+ return init_pseudo(fc, EROFS_SUPER_MAGIC) ? 0 : -ENOMEM;
+}
+
+static struct file_system_type erofs_anon_fs_type = {
+ .owner = THIS_MODULE,
+ .name = "pseudo_erofs",
+ .init_fs_context = erofs_anon_init_fs_context,
+ .kill_sb= kill_anon_super,
+};
+
struct erofs_fscache_request {
struct erofs_fscache_request *primary;
struct netfs_cache_resources cache_resources;
@@ -381,7 +394,7 @@ static int erofs_fscache_init_domain(struct super_block *sb)
goto out;
if (!erofs_pseudo_mnt) {
- struct vfsmount *mnt = kern_mount(_fs_type);
+ struct vfsmount *mnt = kern_mount(_anon_fs_type);
if (IS_ERR(mnt)) {
err = PTR_ERR(mnt);
goto out;
diff --git a/fs/erofs/internal.h b/fs/erofs/internal.h
index 0f0706325b7b..701d4eec693a 100644
--- a/fs/erofs/internal.h
+++ b/fs/erofs/internal.h
@@ -385,7 +385,6 @@ struct erofs_map_dev {
unsigned int m_deviceid;
};
-extern struct file_system_type erofs_fs_type;
extern const struct super_operations erofs_sops;
extern const struct address_space_operations erofs_raw_access_aops;
diff --git a/fs/erofs/super.c b/fs/erofs/super.c
index 9b4b66dcdd4f..6fbb1fba2d31 100644
--- a/fs/erofs/super.c
+++ b/fs/erofs/super.c
@@ -579,13 +579,6 @@ static const struct export_operations erofs_export_ops = {
.get_parent = erofs_get_parent,
};
-static int erofs_fc_fill_pseudo_super(struct super_block *sb, struct fs_context *fc)
-{
- static const struct tree_descr empty_descr = {""};
-
- return simple_fill_super(sb, EROFS_SUPER_MAGIC, _descr);
-}
-
static int erofs_fc_fill_super(struct super_block *sb, struct fs_context *fc)
{
struct inode *inode;
@@ -712,11 +705,6 @@ static int
