@@ -1551,6 +1551,7 @@ static int disk_update_zone_resources(struct gendisk *disk,
unsigned int nr_seq_zones, nr_conv_zones;
unsigned int pool_size;
struct queue_limits lim;
+ int ret;
disk->nr_zones = args->nr_zones;
disk->zone_capacity = args->zone_capacity;
@@ -1601,7 +1602,11 @@ static int disk_update_zone_resources(struct gendisk *disk,
}
commit:
- return queue_limits_commit_update(q, &lim);
+ blk_mq_freeze_queue(q);
+ ret = queue_limits_commit_update(q, &lim);
+ blk_mq_unfreeze_queue(q);
+
+ return ret;
}
static int blk_revalidate_conv_zone(struct blk_zone *zone, unsigned int idx,
@@ -1816,14 +1821,15 @@ int blk_revalidate_disk_zones(struct gendisk *disk)
* Set the new disk zone parameters only once the queue is frozen and
* all I/Os are completed.
*/
- blk_mq_freeze_queue(q);
if (ret > 0)
ret = disk_update_zone_resources(disk, &args);
else
pr_warn("%s: failed to revalidate zones\n", disk->disk_name);
- if (ret)
+ if (ret) {
+ blk_mq_freeze_queue(q);
disk_free_zone_resources(disk);
- blk_mq_unfreeze_queue(q);
+ blk_mq_unfreeze_queue(q);
+ }
return ret;
}
The function blk_revalidate_disk_zones() calls the function disk_update_zone_resources() after freezing the device queue. In turn, disk_update_zone_resources() calls queue_limits_start_update() which takes a queue limits mutex lock, resulting in the ordering: q->q_usage_counter check -> q->limits_lock. However, the usual ordering is to always take a queue limit lock before freezing the queue to commit the limits updates, e.g., the code pattern: lim = queue_limits_start_update(q); ... blk_mq_freeze_queue(q); ret = queue_limits_commit_update(q, &lim); blk_mq_unfreeze_queue(q); Thus, blk_revalidate_disk_zones() introduces a potential circular locking dependency deadlock that lockdep sometimes catches with the splat: [ 51.934109] ====================================================== [ 51.935916] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected [ 51.937561] 6.12.0+ #2107 Not tainted [ 51.938648] ------------------------------------------------------ [ 51.940351] kworker/u16:4/157 is trying to acquire lock: [ 51.941805] ffff9fff0aa0bea8 (&q->limits_lock){+.+.}-{4:4}, at: disk_update_zone_resources+0x86/0x170 [ 51.944314] but task is already holding lock: [ 51.945688] ffff9fff0aa0b890 (&q->q_usage_counter(queue)#3){++++}-{0:0}, at: blk_revalidate_disk_zones+0x15f/0x340 [ 51.948527] which lock already depends on the new lock. [ 51.951296] the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is: [ 51.953708] -> #1 (&q->q_usage_counter(queue)#3){++++}-{0:0}: [ 51.956131] blk_queue_enter+0x1c9/0x1e0 [ 51.957290] blk_mq_alloc_request+0x187/0x2a0 [ 51.958365] scsi_execute_cmd+0x78/0x490 [scsi_mod] [ 51.959514] read_capacity_16+0x111/0x410 [sd_mod] [ 51.960693] sd_revalidate_disk.isra.0+0x872/0x3240 [sd_mod] [ 51.962004] sd_probe+0x2d7/0x520 [sd_mod] [ 51.962993] really_probe+0xd5/0x330 [ 51.963898] __driver_probe_device+0x78/0x110 [ 51.964925] driver_probe_device+0x1f/0xa0 [ 51.965916] __driver_attach_async_helper+0x60/0xe0 [ 51.967017] async_run_entry_fn+0x2e/0x140 [ 51.968004] process_one_work+0x21f/0x5a0 [ 51.968987] worker_thread+0x1dc/0x3c0 [ 51.969868] kthread+0xe0/0x110 [ 51.970377] ret_from_fork+0x31/0x50 [ 51.970983] ret_from_fork_asm+0x11/0x20 [ 51.971587] -> #0 (&q->limits_lock){+.+.}-{4:4}: [ 51.972479] __lock_acquire+0x1337/0x2130 [ 51.973133] lock_acquire+0xc5/0x2d0 [ 51.973691] __mutex_lock+0xda/0xcf0 [ 51.974300] disk_update_zone_resources+0x86/0x170 [ 51.975032] blk_revalidate_disk_zones+0x16c/0x340 [ 51.975740] sd_zbc_revalidate_zones+0x73/0x160 [sd_mod] [ 51.976524] sd_revalidate_disk.isra.0+0x465/0x3240 [sd_mod] [ 51.977824] sd_probe+0x2d7/0x520 [sd_mod] [ 51.978917] really_probe+0xd5/0x330 [ 51.979915] __driver_probe_device+0x78/0x110 [ 51.981047] driver_probe_device+0x1f/0xa0 [ 51.982143] __driver_attach_async_helper+0x60/0xe0 [ 51.983282] async_run_entry_fn+0x2e/0x140 [ 51.984319] process_one_work+0x21f/0x5a0 [ 51.985873] worker_thread+0x1dc/0x3c0 [ 51.987289] kthread+0xe0/0x110 [ 51.988546] ret_from_fork+0x31/0x50 [ 51.989926] ret_from_fork_asm+0x11/0x20 [ 51.991376] other info that might help us debug this: [ 51.994127] Possible unsafe locking scenario: [ 51.995651] CPU0 CPU1 [ 51.996694] ---- ---- [ 51.997716] lock(&q->q_usage_counter(queue)#3); [ 51.998817] lock(&q->limits_lock); [ 52.000043] lock(&q->q_usage_counter(queue)#3); [ 52.001638] lock(&q->limits_lock); [ 52.002485] *** DEADLOCK *** Prevent this issue by moving the calls to blk_mq_freeze_queue() and blk_mq_unfreeze_queue() around the call to queue_limits_commit_update() in disk_update_zone_resources(). In case of revalidation failure, the call to disk_free_zone_resources() in blk_revalidate_disk_zones() is still done with the queue frozen as before. Fixes: 843283e96e5a ("block: Fake max open zones limit when there is no limit") Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@kernel.org> --- block/blk-zoned.c | 14 ++++++++++---- 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)