mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: w15303746062@163.com
To: jlayton@kernel.org, chuck.lever@oracle.com,
	viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, brauner@kernel.org
Cc: alex.aring@gmail.com, jack@suse.cz,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Mingyu Wang <25181214217@stu.xidian.edu.cn>
Subject: [PATCH v2] fs/fcntl: fix SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order in fasync signaling
Date: Sat, 23 May 2026 21:52:10 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260523135210.590928-1-w15303746062@163.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d15a25fe784b5d4449c7ce4e56f1428d7ff28885.camel@kernel.org>

From: Mingyu Wang <25181214217@stu.xidian.edu.cn>

A SOFTIRQ-safe to SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order deadlock can occur in
send_sigio() and send_sigurg() when a process group receives a signal.

When FASYNC is configured for a process group (PIDTYPE_PGID), both
functions use read_lock(&tasklist_lock) to traverse the task list.
However, they are frequently called from softirq context:
- send_sigio() via input_inject_event -> kill_fasync
- send_sigurg() via tcp_check_urg -> sk_send_sigurg (NET_RX_SOFTIRQ)

The deadlock is caused by the rwlock writer fairness mechanism:
1. CPU 0 (process context) holds read_lock(&tasklist_lock) in do_wait().
2. CPU 1 (process context) attempts write_lock(&tasklist_lock) in
   fork() or exit() and spins, which blocks all new readers.
3. CPU 0 is interrupted by a softirq (e.g., TCP URG packet reception).
4. The softirq calls send_sigurg() and attempts to acquire
   read_lock(&tasklist_lock), deadlocking because CPU 1 is waiting.

Since PID hashing and do_each_pid_task() traversals are already
RCU-protected, the read_lock on tasklist_lock is no longer strictly
required for safe traversal. Fix this by replacing tasklist_lock with
rcu_read_lock(), aligning the process group signaling path with the
single-PID path. This also mitigates a potential remote denial of
service vector via TCP URG packets.

Lockdep splat:
=====================================================
WARNING: SOFTIRQ-safe -> SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order detected
[...]
Chain exists of:
  &dev->event_lock --> &f_owner->lock --> tasklist_lock

Possible interrupt unsafe locking scenario:
       CPU0                    CPU1
       ----                    ----
  lock(tasklist_lock);
                           local_irq_disable();
                           lock(&dev->event_lock);
                           lock(&f_owner->lock);
  <Interrupt>
    lock(&dev->event_lock);

*** DEADLOCK ***

Reviewed-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Mingyu Wang <25181214217@stu.xidian.edu.cn>
---
Changes in v2:
- Also apply the RCU replacement to send_sigurg() to fix an identical
  deadlock vector triggered by TCP URG packets.
- Add Reviewed-by tag from Jeff Layton.

 fs/fcntl.c | 8 ++++----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/fcntl.c b/fs/fcntl.c
index beab8080badf..92d643a14196 100644
--- a/fs/fcntl.c
+++ b/fs/fcntl.c
@@ -929,11 +929,11 @@ void send_sigio(struct fown_struct *fown, int fd, int band)
 			send_sigio_to_task(p, fown, fd, band, type);
 		rcu_read_unlock();
 	} else {
-		read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
+		rcu_read_lock();
 		do_each_pid_task(pid, type, p) {
 			send_sigio_to_task(p, fown, fd, band, type);
 		} while_each_pid_task(pid, type, p);
-		read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
+		rcu_read_unlock();
 	}
  out_unlock_fown:
 	read_unlock_irqrestore(&fown->lock, flags);
@@ -975,11 +975,11 @@ int send_sigurg(struct file *file)
 			send_sigurg_to_task(p, fown, type);
 		rcu_read_unlock();
 	} else {
-		read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
+		rcu_read_lock();
 		do_each_pid_task(pid, type, p) {
 			send_sigurg_to_task(p, fown, type);
 		} while_each_pid_task(pid, type, p);
-		read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
+		rcu_read_unlock();
 	}
  out_unlock_fown:
 	read_unlock_irqrestore(&fown->lock, flags);
-- 
2.34.1


  reply	other threads:[~2026-05-23 13:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-05-23  8:02 [PATCH] fs/fcntl: fix SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order in send_sigio() w15303746062
2026-05-23 11:08 ` Jeff Layton
2026-05-23 13:52   ` w15303746062 [this message]
2026-05-28 12:40     ` [PATCH v2] fs/fcntl: fix SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order in fasync signaling Christian Brauner
2026-10-04 11:31     ` Oleg Nesterov
2026-10-11 15:57       ` Oleg Nesterov
2026-10-12  1:42         ` Mingyu Wang
2026-10-12 15:39           ` Oleg Nesterov
2026-10-12 16:00             ` Mingyu Wang
2026-10-12 16:29               ` Oleg Nesterov
2026-10-12 17:33                 ` Oleg Nesterov
2026-10-13  1:36                   ` Mingyu Wang
2026-10-14 12:01                     ` Oleg Nesterov
2026-10-14 12:16                       ` Mingyu Wang
2026-10-12 11:59         ` Jeff Layton
2026-10-12 15:15           ` Oleg Nesterov

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20260523135210.590928-1-w15303746062@163.com \
    --to=w15303746062@163.com \
    --cc=25181214217@stu.xidian.edu.cn \
    --cc=alex.aring@gmail.com \
    --cc=brauner@kernel.org \
    --cc=chuck.lever@oracle.com \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=jlayton@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®