From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1751798AbdBJHgH (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Fri, 10 Feb 2017 02:36:07 -0500
Received: from a.mx.secunet.com ([62.96.220.36]:46988 "EHLO a.mx.secunet.com"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1751377AbdBJHgF (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Fri, 10 Feb 2017 02:36:05 -0500
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2017 08:35:40 +0100
From: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@secunet.com>
To: Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>
CC: <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, <dvyukov@google.com>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH ipsec] xfrm: policy: init locks early
Message-ID: <20170210073540.GY30338@gauss.secunet.com>
References: <CACT4Y+Yd3zgOgtsAjdsREY3vm=bCNif-keYgvFeWGMckWrrjEw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20170208105229.27285-1-fw@strlen.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20170208105229.27285-1-fw@strlen.de>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-Originating-IP: [10.182.7.102]
X-G-Data-MailSecurity-for-Exchange-State: 0
X-G-Data-MailSecurity-for-Exchange-Error: 0
X-G-Data-MailSecurity-for-Exchange-Sender: 23
X-G-Data-MailSecurity-for-Exchange-Server: d65e63f7-5c15-413f-8f63-c0d707471c93
X-EXCLAIMER-MD-CONFIG: 2c86f778-e09b-4440-8b15-867914633a10
X-G-Data-MailSecurity-for-Exchange-Guid: 90A72580-5AFD-4A14-9652-4C4544878FBB
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 11:52:29AM +0100, Florian Westphal wrote:
> Dmitry reports following splat:
>  INFO: trying to register non-static key.
>  the code is fine but needs lockdep annotation.
>  turning off the locking correctness validator.
>  CPU: 0 PID: 13059 Comm: syz-executor1 Not tainted 4.10.0-rc7-next-20170207 #1
> [..]
>  spin_lock_bh include/linux/spinlock.h:304 [inline]
>  xfrm_policy_flush+0x32/0x470 net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c:963
>  xfrm_policy_fini+0xbf/0x560 net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c:3041
>  xfrm_net_init+0x79f/0x9e0 net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c:3091
>  ops_init+0x10a/0x530 net/core/net_namespace.c:115
>  setup_net+0x2ed/0x690 net/core/net_namespace.c:291
>  copy_net_ns+0x26c/0x530 net/core/net_namespace.c:396
>  create_new_namespaces+0x409/0x860 kernel/nsproxy.c:106
>  unshare_nsproxy_namespaces+0xae/0x1e0 kernel/nsproxy.c:205
>  SYSC_unshare kernel/fork.c:2281 [inline]
> 
> Problem is that when we get error during xfrm_net_init we will call
> xfrm_policy_fini which will acquire xfrm_policy_lock before it was
> initialized.  Just move it around so locks get set up first.
> 
> Reported-by: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>
> Fixes: 283bc9f35bbbcb0e9 ("xfrm: Namespacify xfrm state/policy locks")
> Signed-off-by: Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>

Applied, thanks everyone!