From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sipsolutions.net (s3.sipsolutions.net [168.119.38.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2383D2F30; Fri, 19 Jul 2024 16:30:21 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=168.119.38.16 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1721406626; cv=none; b=oAIunjBQBeiB59WcUHxSZEQoY3phJ1dib0RzhFwEfVmRuQKgPMLc3y2iE9Pdb9K1Q0qHw72EuibqNGPrrmcFBBpPqY5rnOHAlvLTJTAbi19Y93/3q8jnRqiL0TJiAJMfBaqO+LcGQ2RcB4KMyJ56KeSB4ffPUYcsylWiK58LAqs= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1721406626; c=relaxed/simple; bh=e0NVU5/QvWmtxtTLF5jE4+fsPTL2De984G1pyVqWgCA=; h=Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References: Content-Type:MIME-Version; b=OfQik1vUB+sERJvEzld4eKPk3l6NWwzXcikuEMyoluUApqgddgfC/a//O+bB34DeLpnS8ccrwWD8XeODTSI8rfkuvffd45JTyjuIukwHXyOTxjRNQIXN20iq56T3wvEUc/CW6HzGz1Vx97Bmv5XnRw6mTky35hf/8savaPWwfTQ= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=sipsolutions.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sipsolutions.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sipsolutions.net header.i=@sipsolutions.net header.b=xz9jjY/h; arc=none smtp.client-ip=168.119.38.16 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=sipsolutions.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sipsolutions.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sipsolutions.net header.i=@sipsolutions.net header.b="xz9jjY/h" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sipsolutions.net; s=mail; h=MIME-Version:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:References:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:To:From:Subject:Message-ID:Sender :Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-To: Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID; bh=TYVHuHtpoWicDB96C1fux2IstVVFjuVJavo44U+S8tk=; t=1721406622; x=1722616222; b=xz9jjY/hrJH08tD/FooMUe8vYwacv6R2NHZCAJkcrEzooGc qEfoi2ztv3ARETUl7ktcS52Ddij89C6nC0ausC7kIR5bFJ1xNbZgULRn7ywrEnCDQg/TZzUd6Sco3 DQUeBPewGwHrNEHLRWpUutI3jiyzCUcZdrsijYNTBH2pASv/sHAi5S4CIw4xj/dXAx4eym0/7bbuY NyBdPhBpJzULKtLm8i37hnbjURfJeMj7mgG67gMKYInz32lXiO9yFZAV6DIHI8kzxW9tPcagH8SNu /k81IIbe4KNGfgJD/VKOwBnWIQyl76tXazCc653WY8Z0yAq/QIrD2PHDNB7HkPhA==; Received: by sipsolutions.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_X25519__RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256) (Exim 4.97) (envelope-from ) id 1sUqUn-000000041Jf-1yxc; Fri, 19 Jul 2024 18:30:14 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [syzbot] [wireless?] INFO: task hung in rfkill_global_led_trigger_worker (3) From: Johannes Berg To: Tetsuo Handa , Krzysztof Kozlowski Cc: syzbot+50499e163bfa302dfe7b@syzkaller.appspotmail.com, syzkaller-bugs , Network Development , LKML , linux-wireless Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2024 09:30:10 -0700 In-Reply-To: <15930e85-3b82-4119-b1ef-d899ac03fa3d@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> References: <000000000000114385061d997d9c@google.com> <15930e85-3b82-4119-b1ef-d899ac03fa3d@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.52.3 (3.52.3-1.fc40) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-malware-bazaar: not-scanned On Fri, 2024-07-19 at 22:59 +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > This is a deadlock which lockdep cannot detect. > Please check which lock should be taken first. >=20 > 2 locks held by syz.1.2508/23558: > #0: ffff88805ff4f100 (&dev->mutex){....}-{3:3}, at: device_lock include/= linux/device.h:1009 [inline] > #0: ffff88805ff4f100 (&dev->mutex){....}-{3:3}, at: nfc_unregister_devic= e+0x63/0x2a0 net/nfc/core.c:1165 > #1: ffffffff8f8e1b88 (rfkill_global_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: rfkill_unreg= ister+0xd0/0x230 net/rfkill/core.c:1149 > 2 locks held by syz.4.2510/23544: > #0: ffffffff8f8e1b88 (rfkill_global_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: rfkill_fop_w= rite+0x1a9/0x790 net/rfkill/core.c:1297 > #1: ffff88805ff4f100 (&dev->mutex){....}-{3:3}, at: device_lock include/= linux/device.h:1009 [inline] > #1: ffff88805ff4f100 (&dev->mutex){....}-{3:3}, at: nfc_dev_down net/nfc= /core.c:143 [inline] > #1: ffff88805ff4f100 (&dev->mutex){....}-{3:3}, at: nfc_rfkill_set_block= +0x50/0x310 net/nfc/core.c:179 Yeah, this is a well-known issue; I believe this should be fixed in the NFC (virtual) device. johannes