From: Joseph Qi <joseph.qi@linux.alibaba.com>
To: CJ <firefly0158@163.com>
Cc: mark@fasheh.com, jlbec@evilplan.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
syzbot+1782a3a587bc53dc10cf@syzkaller.appspotmail.com,
"ocfs2-devel@lists.linux.dev" <ocfs2-devel@lists.linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [BUG] ocfs2: possible deadlock in ocfs2_write_begin_nolock on v7.2-rc3
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2026 14:57:41 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e54162e3-377e-480f-970d-d60f25db2b94@linux.alibaba.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <900645a7-97a7-4ebf-9266-6c7e6269c3fc@linux.alibaba.com>
It seems has been fixed in latest kernel, please confirm.
Thanks,
Joseph
On 9/4/26 11:02 AM, Joseph Qi wrote:
> Seems you posted into a stale mail list.
>
> +cc ocfs2-devel@lists.linux.dev
>
> On 9/3/26 2:51 PM, CJ wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am reporting that possible deadlock in ocfs2_write_begin_nolock remains
>> reproducible with a migrated syzkaller reproducer on Linux 7.2-rc3. The
>> tested HEAD commit is a13c140cc289c0b7b3770bce5b3ad42ab35074aa.
>>
>> The reproducer mounts a crafted OCFS2 image and performs file and xattr
>> operations that enter the buffered write path.
>>
>> Lockdep reports a circular dependency when ocfs2_write_begin_nolock() starts
>> a transaction while the inode allocation semaphore is already held. The
>> reverse dependency is established through OCFS2 refcount-tree and xattr
>> handling.
>>
>> This looks like an inconsistent lock ordering between the inode allocation
>> semaphore and the filesystem transaction lock in the OCFS2 write path.
>>
>> This issue was previously reported at:
>>
>> https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=1782a3a587bc53dc10cf
>>
>> Reproducer:
>>
>> syz reproducer: https://pastebin.com/raw/Ch9E7gAi
>>
>> console output: https://pastebin.com/raw/02Zj2gLb
>> kernel config: https://pastebin.com/raw/RLSmRk5j
>> Kernel:
>>
>> HEAD commit: a13c140cc289c0b7b3770bce5b3ad42ab35074aa
>> git tree: torvalds/linux
>> kernel version: 7.2.0-rc3 #1 PREEMPT(full)
>> tested tag: v7.2-rc3
>>
>> Let me know if you need more details or testing.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Xianying
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-04 6:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-03 6:51 CJ
2026-09-04 3:02 ` Joseph Qi
2026-09-04 6:57 ` Joseph Qi [this message]
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=e54162e3-377e-480f-970d-d60f25db2b94@linux.alibaba.com \
--to=joseph.qi@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=firefly0158@163.com \
--cc=jlbec@evilplan.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark@fasheh.com \
--cc=ocfs2-devel@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=syzbot+1782a3a587bc53dc10cf@syzkaller.appspotmail.com \
/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®