* [PATCH v1] block/mq-deadline: hold elevator_lock in debugfs next_rq show
@ 2026-07-21 6:30 Xixin Liu
2026-07-22 17:44 ` Bart Van Assche
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Xixin Liu @ 2026-07-21 6:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-block; +Cc: axboe, linux-kernel, liuxixin
deadline_*_next_rq_show() dereferences q->elevator->elevator_data without
holding elevator_lock. Concurrent elevator switch to "none" clears
q->elevator under that lock and tears down the scheduler, so readers
crash with a null-ptr-deref.
Hold elevator_lock around the show path and bail out if the elevator has
already been removed, matching other blk-mq debugfs readers that look at
elevator state.
Reproduced on linux-next with KASAN by reading write1_next_rq via debugfs
while switching the elevator from mq-deadline to none under fio load:
BUG: KASAN: null-ptr-deref in deadline_write1_next_rq_show+0x3c/0xf0
Read of size 8 at addr 0000000000000010 by task cat/140857
Call trace:
deadline_write1_next_rq_show+0x3c/0xf0
blk_mq_debugfs_show+0x58/0x78
seq_read_iter+0x254/0x6f8
seq_read+0x1a0/0x220
vfs_read+0x14c/0x528
Signed-off-by: Xixin Liu <liuxixin@kylinos.cn>
---
block/mq-deadline.c | 16 ++++++++++++----
1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/block/mq-deadline.c b/block/mq-deadline.c
index 824bfc17b2c6..e7c4a91b2d08 100644
--- a/block/mq-deadline.c
+++ b/block/mq-deadline.c
@@ -842,14 +842,22 @@ static int deadline_##name##_next_rq_show(void *data, \
struct seq_file *m) \
{ \
struct request_queue *q = data; \
- struct deadline_data *dd = q->elevator->elevator_data; \
- struct dd_per_prio *per_prio = &dd->per_prio[prio]; \
+ struct elevator_queue *e; \
+ struct deadline_data *dd; \
+ struct dd_per_prio *per_prio; \
struct request *rq; \
+ int ret; \
\
+ ret = mutex_lock_interruptible(&q->elevator_lock); \
+ if (ret) \
+ return ret; \
+ e = q->elevator; \
+ if (!e) \
+ goto unlock; \
+ dd = e->elevator_data; \
+ per_prio = &dd->per_prio[prio]; \
rq = deadline_from_pos(per_prio, data_dir, \
per_prio->latest_pos[data_dir]); \
if (rq) \
__blk_mq_debugfs_rq_show(m, rq); \
+unlock: \
+ mutex_unlock(&q->elevator_lock); \
return 0; \
}
--
2.43.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v1] block/mq-deadline: hold elevator_lock in debugfs next_rq show
2026-07-21 6:30 [PATCH v1] block/mq-deadline: hold elevator_lock in debugfs next_rq show Xixin Liu
@ 2026-07-22 17:44 ` Bart Van Assche
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Bart Van Assche @ 2026-07-22 17:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Xixin Liu, linux-block; +Cc: axboe, linux-kernel
On 7/20/26 11:30 PM, Xixin Liu wrote:
> diff --git a/block/mq-deadline.c b/block/mq-deadline.c
> index 824bfc17b2c6..e7c4a91b2d08 100644
> --- a/block/mq-deadline.c
> +++ b/block/mq-deadline.c
> @@ -842,14 +842,22 @@ static int deadline_##name##_next_rq_show(void *data, \
> struct seq_file *m) \
> { \
> struct request_queue *q = data; \
> - struct deadline_data *dd = q->elevator->elevator_data; \
> - struct dd_per_prio *per_prio = &dd->per_prio[prio]; \
> + struct elevator_queue *e; \
> + struct deadline_data *dd; \
> + struct dd_per_prio *per_prio; \
> struct request *rq; \
> + int ret; \
> \
> + ret = mutex_lock_interruptible(&q->elevator_lock); \
> + if (ret) \
> + return ret; \
> + e = q->elevator; \
> + if (!e) \
> + goto unlock; \
> + dd = e->elevator_data; \
> + per_prio = &dd->per_prio[prio]; \
> rq = deadline_from_pos(per_prio, data_dir, \
> per_prio->latest_pos[data_dir]); \
> if (rq) \
> __blk_mq_debugfs_rq_show(m, rq); \
> +unlock: \
> + mutex_unlock(&q->elevator_lock); \
> return 0; \
> }
>
The above patch uses the wrong lock and brings way too much code under
the lock. Please help with testing this patch:
diff --git a/block/mq-deadline.c b/block/mq-deadline.c
index 6e8f87e07eb9..c52601c1fa13 100644
--- a/block/mq-deadline.c
+++ b/block/mq-deadline.c
@@ -850,6 +850,7 @@ static int deadline_##name##_next_rq_show(void
*data, \
struct dd_per_prio *per_prio = &dd->per_prio[prio]; \
struct request *rq; \
\
+ guard(spinlock)(&dd->lock); \
rq = deadline_from_pos(per_prio, data_dir, \
per_prio->latest_pos[data_dir]); \
if (rq) \
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: 回复: Re: 回复: Re: [PATCH v1] block/mq-deadline: hold elevator_lock in debugfs next_rq show
[not found] <4vwol95qmudj-4vww18fcfi2w@nsmail8.2--kylin--1>
@ 2026-07-23 17:38 ` Bart Van Assche
2026-07-27 9:45 ` Xixin Liu
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Bart Van Assche @ 2026-07-23 17:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 刘喜鑫, linux-block; +Cc: axboe, linux-kernel
On 7/22/26 7:37 PM, 刘喜鑫 wrote:
> That approach did not take effect, so I switched to the current patch.
>
> I have verified the current patch, and the KASAN crash is gone with it.
The following is missing from your patch:
- An explanation why q->elevator_lock is locked instead of dd->lock. I
think that you are misunderstanding the purpose of these locks.
- An explanation why locking q->elevator_lock from inside a debugfs
attribute neither triggers lock inversion nor a deadlock.
- An explanation why the dd and per_prio assignments happen with the
lock held. This seems unnecessary to me because neither
e->elevator_data nor the address of dd->per_prio[] are modified while
the mq-deadline debugfs attributes exist. Did I perhaps overlook
something?
Bart.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v1] block/mq-deadline: hold elevator_lock in debugfs next_rq show
2026-07-23 17:38 ` 回复: Re: 回复: " Bart Van Assche
@ 2026-07-27 9:45 ` Xixin Liu
2026-07-27 10:25 ` Xixin Liu
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Xixin Liu @ 2026-07-27 9:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bvanassche; +Cc: linux-block, axboe, linux-kernel, liuxixin
On Fri, 24 Jul 2026, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> The following is missing from your patch:
> - An explanation why q->elevator_lock is locked instead of dd->lock. I
> think that you are misunderstanding the purpose of these locks.
Agreed on the distinction. dd->lock protects mq-deadline's internal
lists/trees; elevator_lock serializes q->elevator against switch/teardown.
The crash we hit is the latter: concurrent elevator switch clears
q->elevator under elevator_lock, so next_rq_show can deref a NULL
elevator before any dd->lock is reachable. For this LIFE bug,
elevator_lock is what can close the race; dd->lock cannot.
Fifo and the other remaining debugfs attrs have the same LIFE gap on
elevator switch: stock may take dd->lock for list walks, but still
loads q->elevator unlocked first. I will cover those in a separate
follow-up.
> - An explanation why locking q->elevator_lock from inside a debugfs
> attribute neither triggers lock inversion nor a deadlock.
This next_rq show path takes only elevator_lock, briefly, and does not
nest it with dd->lock. Elevator switch takes the same mutex, so the
reader serializes with teardown rather than deadlocking; there is no
new elevator_lock <-> dd->lock nesting or inversion on this path.
> - An explanation why the dd and per_prio assignments happen with the
> lock held. This seems unnecessary to me because neither
> e->elevator_data nor the address of dd->per_prio[] are modified while
> the mq-deadline debugfs attributes exist. Did I perhaps overlook
> something?
On the width of the critical section we agree in part: holding the lock
through the tree walk and seq show is wider than needed. Loading only
e and dd under elevator_lock, then unlocking, is enough; per_prio,
deadline_from_pos, and the seq show can run after unlock. v2 does:
ret = mutex_lock_interruptible(&q->elevator_lock);
...
e = q->elevator;
if (!e) {
mutex_unlock(&q->elevator_lock);
return 0;
}
dd = e->elevator_data;
mutex_unlock(&q->elevator_lock);
per_prio = &dd->per_prio[prio];
rq = deadline_from_pos(...);
Thanks,
Xixin
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v1] block/mq-deadline: hold elevator_lock in debugfs next_rq show
2026-07-27 9:45 ` Xixin Liu
@ 2026-07-27 10:25 ` Xixin Liu
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Xixin Liu @ 2026-07-27 10:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bvanassche; +Cc: linux-block, axboe, linux-kernel, liuxixin
Hi Bart,
To add to my previous reply:
This part needs dd->lock, for example:
per_prio = &dd->per_prio[prio];
rq = deadline_from_pos(...);
because both the per-priority state selection and the subsequent
deadline_from_pos() walk access mq-deadline internal state that is
protected by dd->lock.
Separately, q->elevator_lock is still needed earlier to stabilize
q->elevator and obtain e->elevator_data safely during an elevator
switch.
Thanks,
Xixin
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2026-07-27 10:37 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2026-07-21 6:30 [PATCH v1] block/mq-deadline: hold elevator_lock in debugfs next_rq show Xixin Liu
2026-07-22 17:44 ` Bart Van Assche
[not found] <4vwol95qmudj-4vww18fcfi2w@nsmail8.2--kylin--1>
2026-07-23 17:38 ` 回复: Re: 回复: " Bart Van Assche
2026-07-27 9:45 ` Xixin Liu
2026-07-27 10:25 ` Xixin Liu
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®