* Re: [syzbot] [block?] possible deadlock in blkdev_read_iter
[not found] <697400dc.a70a0220.35de72.000a.GAE@google.com>
@ 2026-01-24 11:31 ` Hillf Danton
2026-01-26 17:20 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Hillf Danton @ 2026-01-24 11:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: syzbot
Cc: axboe, linux-block, Lorenzo Stoakes, Suren Baghdasaryan,
linux-mm, linux-kernel, syzkaller-bugs
Add Lorenzo and Suren
> Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2026 15:14:36 -0800
> Hello,
>
> syzbot found the following issue on:
>
> HEAD commit: 24d479d26b25 Linux 6.19-rc6
> git tree: upstream
> console output: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/log.txt?x=100033fa580000
> kernel config: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/.config?x=1859476832863c41
> dashboard link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=4e70c8e0a2017b432f7a
> compiler: gcc (Debian 12.2.0-14+deb12u1) 12.2.0, GNU ld (GNU Binutils for Debian) 2.40
> syz repro: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/repro.syz?x=11451b9a580000
> C reproducer: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/repro.c?x=1045e852580000
>
> Downloadable assets:
> disk image (non-bootable): https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/d900f083ada3/non_bootable_disk-24d479d2.raw.xz
> vmlinux: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/d0f3c47f6869/vmlinux-24d479d2.xz
> kernel image: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/800231513703/bzImage-24d479d2.xz
>
> IMPORTANT: if you fix the issue, please add the following tag to the commit:
> Reported-by: syzbot+4e70c8e0a2017b432f7a@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
>
> WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
> syzkaller #0 Not tainted
> ------------------------------------------------------
> syz.0.17/6091 is trying to acquire lock:
> ffff8881061287a8 (
> &sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8){++++}-{4:4}, at: inode_lock_shared include/linux/fs.h:1042 [inline]
> &sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8){++++}-{4:4}, at: blkdev_read_iter+0x19e/0x500 block/fops.c:855
>
> but task is already holding lock:
> ffff888012aa0448 (vm_lock){++++}-{0:0}, at: lock_next_vma+0x10e/0xed0 mm/mmap_lock.c:334
>
> which lock already depends on the new lock.
>
>
> the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
>
> -> #2 (vm_lock){++++}-{0:0}:
> __vma_enter_locked+0x260/0x770 mm/mmap_lock.c:72
> __vma_start_write+0x21/0x160 mm/mmap_lock.c:104
> vma_start_write include/linux/mmap_lock.h:213 [inline]
> mprotect_fixup+0x4e3/0xb80 mm/mprotect.c:768
> setup_arg_pages+0x4a2/0xbb0 fs/exec.c:670
> load_elf_binary+0xb5b/0x4fe0 fs/binfmt_elf.c:1028
> search_binary_handler fs/exec.c:1669 [inline]
> exec_binprm fs/exec.c:1701 [inline]
> bprm_execve fs/exec.c:1753 [inline]
> bprm_execve+0x8c2/0x1620 fs/exec.c:1729
> kernel_execve+0x2ef/0x3b0 fs/exec.c:1919
> try_to_run_init_process init/main.c:1506 [inline]
> kernel_init+0x14a/0x2b0 init/main.c:1634
> ret_from_fork+0x983/0xb10 arch/x86/kernel/process.c:158
> ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30 arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:246
>
> -> #1 (&mm->mmap_lock){++++}-{4:4}:
> __might_fault mm/memory.c:7174 [inline]
> __might_fault+0x113/0x190 mm/memory.c:7168
> _copy_to_iter+0x1c2/0x1710 lib/iov_iter.c:196
> copy_page_to_iter lib/iov_iter.c:374 [inline]
> copy_page_to_iter+0x12a/0x1e0 lib/iov_iter.c:361
> copy_folio_to_iter include/linux/uio.h:204 [inline]
> filemap_read+0x6b1/0xe40 mm/filemap.c:2851
> blkdev_read_iter+0x1ac/0x500 block/fops.c:856
> new_sync_read fs/read_write.c:491 [inline]
> vfs_read+0x8bf/0xcf0 fs/read_write.c:572
> ksys_read+0x12a/0x250 fs/read_write.c:715
> do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline]
> do_syscall_64+0xcd/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94
> entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
>
> -> #0 (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8){++++}-{4:4}:
> check_prev_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3165 [inline]
> check_prevs_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3284 [inline]
> validate_chain kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3908 [inline]
> __lock_acquire+0x1669/0x2890 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5237
> lock_acquire kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5868 [inline]
> lock_acquire+0x179/0x330 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5825
> down_read+0x9b/0x460 kernel/locking/rwsem.c:1537
> inode_lock_shared include/linux/fs.h:1042 [inline]
> blkdev_read_iter+0x19e/0x500 block/fops.c:855
> __kernel_read+0x3f3/0xbf0 fs/read_write.c:530
> freader_fetch+0x1d7/0x9d0 lib/buildid.c:100
> __build_id_parse.isra.0+0xdd/0x6c0 lib/buildid.c:297
> do_procmap_query+0xb0e/0x1080 fs/proc/task_mmu.c:733
> procfs_procmap_ioctl+0x9d/0xe0 fs/proc/task_mmu.c:813
> vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline]
> __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:597 [inline]
> __se_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:583 [inline]
> __x64_sys_ioctl+0x18e/0x210 fs/ioctl.c:583
> do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline]
> do_syscall_64+0xcd/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94
> entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
>
> other info that might help us debug this:
>
> Chain exists of:
> &sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8 --> &mm->mmap_lock --> vm_lock
>
> Possible unsafe locking scenario:
>
> CPU0 CPU1
> ---- ----
> rlock(vm_lock);
> lock(&mm->mmap_lock);
> lock(vm_lock);
> rlock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8);
>
> *** DEADLOCK ***
>
> 1 lock held by syz.0.17/6091:
> #0: ffff888012aa0448 (vm_lock){++++}-{0:0}, at: lock_next_vma+0x10e/0xed0 mm/mmap_lock.c:334
>
> stack backtrace:
> CPU: 2 UID: 0 PID: 6091 Comm: syz.0.17 Not tainted syzkaller #0 PREEMPT(full)
> Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 1.16.3-debian-1.16.3-2~bpo12+1 04/01/2014
> Call Trace:
> <TASK>
> __dump_stack lib/dump_stack.c:94 [inline]
> dump_stack_lvl+0x116/0x1f0 lib/dump_stack.c:120
> print_circular_bug+0x275/0x340 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:2043
> check_noncircular+0x146/0x160 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:2175
> check_prev_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3165 [inline]
> check_prevs_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3284 [inline]
> validate_chain kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3908 [inline]
> __lock_acquire+0x1669/0x2890 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5237
> lock_acquire kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5868 [inline]
> lock_acquire+0x179/0x330 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5825
> down_read+0x9b/0x460 kernel/locking/rwsem.c:1537
> inode_lock_shared include/linux/fs.h:1042 [inline]
> blkdev_read_iter+0x19e/0x500 block/fops.c:855
> __kernel_read+0x3f3/0xbf0 fs/read_write.c:530
> freader_fetch+0x1d7/0x9d0 lib/buildid.c:100
> __build_id_parse.isra.0+0xdd/0x6c0 lib/buildid.c:297
> do_procmap_query+0xb0e/0x1080 fs/proc/task_mmu.c:733
> procfs_procmap_ioctl+0x9d/0xe0 fs/proc/task_mmu.c:813
> vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline]
> __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:597 [inline]
> __se_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:583 [inline]
> __x64_sys_ioctl+0x18e/0x210 fs/ioctl.c:583
> do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline]
> do_syscall_64+0xcd/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94
> entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
> RIP: 0033:0x7ff1a238f7c9
> Code: ff ff c3 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 0f 1f 40 00 48 89 f8 48 89 f7 48 89 d6 48 89 ca 4d 89 c2 4d 89 c8 4c 8b 4c 24 08 0f 05 <48> 3d 01 f0 ff ff 73 01 c3 48 c7 c1 a8 ff ff ff f7 d8 64 89 01 48
> RSP: 002b:00007ffebbe538b8 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000010
> RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00007ff1a25e5fa0 RCX: 00007ff1a238f7c9
> RDX: 0000200000000180 RSI: 00000000c0686611 RDI: 0000000000000004
> RBP: 00007ff1a2413f91 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000
> R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 0000000000000000
> R13: 00007ff1a25e5fa0 R14: 00007ff1a25e5fa0 R15: 0000000000000003
> </TASK>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [syzbot] [block?] possible deadlock in blkdev_read_iter
2026-01-24 11:31 ` [syzbot] [block?] possible deadlock in blkdev_read_iter Hillf Danton
@ 2026-01-26 17:20 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2026-01-26 22:33 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Suren Baghdasaryan @ 2026-01-26 17:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Hillf Danton
Cc: syzbot, axboe, linux-block, Lorenzo Stoakes, linux-mm,
linux-kernel, syzkaller-bugs
On Sat, Jan 24, 2026 at 3:32 AM Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com> wrote:
>
> Add Lorenzo and Suren
Thanks!
>
> > Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2026 15:14:36 -0800
> > Hello,
> >
> > syzbot found the following issue on:
> >
> > HEAD commit: 24d479d26b25 Linux 6.19-rc6
> > git tree: upstream
> > console output: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/log.txt?x=100033fa580000
> > kernel config: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/.config?x=1859476832863c41
> > dashboard link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=4e70c8e0a2017b432f7a
> > compiler: gcc (Debian 12.2.0-14+deb12u1) 12.2.0, GNU ld (GNU Binutils for Debian) 2.40
> > syz repro: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/repro.syz?x=11451b9a580000
> > C reproducer: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/repro.c?x=1045e852580000
> >
> > Downloadable assets:
> > disk image (non-bootable): https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/d900f083ada3/non_bootable_disk-24d479d2.raw.xz
> > vmlinux: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/d0f3c47f6869/vmlinux-24d479d2.xz
> > kernel image: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/800231513703/bzImage-24d479d2.xz
> >
> > IMPORTANT: if you fix the issue, please add the following tag to the commit:
> > Reported-by: syzbot+4e70c8e0a2017b432f7a@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
> >
> > WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
> > syzkaller #0 Not tainted
> > ------------------------------------------------------
> > syz.0.17/6091 is trying to acquire lock:
> > ffff8881061287a8 (
> > &sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8){++++}-{4:4}, at: inode_lock_shared include/linux/fs.h:1042 [inline]
> > &sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8){++++}-{4:4}, at: blkdev_read_iter+0x19e/0x500 block/fops.c:855
> >
> > but task is already holding lock:
> > ffff888012aa0448 (vm_lock){++++}-{0:0}, at: lock_next_vma+0x10e/0xed0 mm/mmap_lock.c:334
> >
> > which lock already depends on the new lock.
> >
> >
> > the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
> >
> > -> #2 (vm_lock){++++}-{0:0}:
> > __vma_enter_locked+0x260/0x770 mm/mmap_lock.c:72
> > __vma_start_write+0x21/0x160 mm/mmap_lock.c:104
> > vma_start_write include/linux/mmap_lock.h:213 [inline]
> > mprotect_fixup+0x4e3/0xb80 mm/mprotect.c:768
> > setup_arg_pages+0x4a2/0xbb0 fs/exec.c:670
> > load_elf_binary+0xb5b/0x4fe0 fs/binfmt_elf.c:1028
> > search_binary_handler fs/exec.c:1669 [inline]
> > exec_binprm fs/exec.c:1701 [inline]
> > bprm_execve fs/exec.c:1753 [inline]
> > bprm_execve+0x8c2/0x1620 fs/exec.c:1729
> > kernel_execve+0x2ef/0x3b0 fs/exec.c:1919
> > try_to_run_init_process init/main.c:1506 [inline]
> > kernel_init+0x14a/0x2b0 init/main.c:1634
> > ret_from_fork+0x983/0xb10 arch/x86/kernel/process.c:158
> > ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30 arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:246
> >
> > -> #1 (&mm->mmap_lock){++++}-{4:4}:
> > __might_fault mm/memory.c:7174 [inline]
> > __might_fault+0x113/0x190 mm/memory.c:7168
> > _copy_to_iter+0x1c2/0x1710 lib/iov_iter.c:196
> > copy_page_to_iter lib/iov_iter.c:374 [inline]
> > copy_page_to_iter+0x12a/0x1e0 lib/iov_iter.c:361
> > copy_folio_to_iter include/linux/uio.h:204 [inline]
> > filemap_read+0x6b1/0xe40 mm/filemap.c:2851
> > blkdev_read_iter+0x1ac/0x500 block/fops.c:856
> > new_sync_read fs/read_write.c:491 [inline]
> > vfs_read+0x8bf/0xcf0 fs/read_write.c:572
> > ksys_read+0x12a/0x250 fs/read_write.c:715
> > do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline]
> > do_syscall_64+0xcd/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94
> > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
> >
> > -> #0 (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8){++++}-{4:4}:
> > check_prev_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3165 [inline]
> > check_prevs_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3284 [inline]
> > validate_chain kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3908 [inline]
> > __lock_acquire+0x1669/0x2890 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5237
> > lock_acquire kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5868 [inline]
> > lock_acquire+0x179/0x330 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5825
> > down_read+0x9b/0x460 kernel/locking/rwsem.c:1537
> > inode_lock_shared include/linux/fs.h:1042 [inline]
> > blkdev_read_iter+0x19e/0x500 block/fops.c:855
> > __kernel_read+0x3f3/0xbf0 fs/read_write.c:530
> > freader_fetch+0x1d7/0x9d0 lib/buildid.c:100
> > __build_id_parse.isra.0+0xdd/0x6c0 lib/buildid.c:297
> > do_procmap_query+0xb0e/0x1080 fs/proc/task_mmu.c:733
> > procfs_procmap_ioctl+0x9d/0xe0 fs/proc/task_mmu.c:813
> > vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline]
> > __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:597 [inline]
> > __se_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:583 [inline]
> > __x64_sys_ioctl+0x18e/0x210 fs/ioctl.c:583
> > do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline]
> > do_syscall_64+0xcd/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94
> > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
> >
It looks like:
#0 is executing PROCMAP_QUERY ioclt, read-locks vm_lock and then calls
build_id_parse()->__build_id_parse(...,
may_fault=true)->__kernel_read() which eventually takes
inode->i_rwsem.
#1 is a file-backed page fault which asserts that it might take
mmap_lock for read.
#2 is load_elf_binary()->mprotect_fixup() which write-locks both
mmap_lock and vm_lock. I'm guessing it already holds inode->i_rwsem
before write-locking these locks.
Originally I thought the issue is most liley introduced in
d9d1c2d81797 ("fs/proc/task_mmu: execute PROCMAP_QUERY ioctl under
per-vma locks"). But if #2 indeed takes inode->i_rwsem before
write-locking mmap_lock, then the problem should exist even before
that change when we didn't use vm_lock and relied on mmap_lock...
I'll try to analyze this more before attempting a fix.
> > other info that might help us debug this:
> >
> > Chain exists of:
> > &sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8 --> &mm->mmap_lock --> vm_lock
> >
> > Possible unsafe locking scenario:
> >
> > CPU0 CPU1
> > ---- ----
> > rlock(vm_lock);
> > lock(&mm->mmap_lock);
> > lock(vm_lock);
> > rlock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8);
> >
> > *** DEADLOCK ***
> >
> > 1 lock held by syz.0.17/6091:
> > #0: ffff888012aa0448 (vm_lock){++++}-{0:0}, at: lock_next_vma+0x10e/0xed0 mm/mmap_lock.c:334
> >
> > stack backtrace:
> > CPU: 2 UID: 0 PID: 6091 Comm: syz.0.17 Not tainted syzkaller #0 PREEMPT(full)
> > Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 1.16.3-debian-1.16.3-2~bpo12+1 04/01/2014
> > Call Trace:
> > <TASK>
> > __dump_stack lib/dump_stack.c:94 [inline]
> > dump_stack_lvl+0x116/0x1f0 lib/dump_stack.c:120
> > print_circular_bug+0x275/0x340 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:2043
> > check_noncircular+0x146/0x160 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:2175
> > check_prev_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3165 [inline]
> > check_prevs_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3284 [inline]
> > validate_chain kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3908 [inline]
> > __lock_acquire+0x1669/0x2890 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5237
> > lock_acquire kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5868 [inline]
> > lock_acquire+0x179/0x330 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5825
> > down_read+0x9b/0x460 kernel/locking/rwsem.c:1537
> > inode_lock_shared include/linux/fs.h:1042 [inline]
> > blkdev_read_iter+0x19e/0x500 block/fops.c:855
> > __kernel_read+0x3f3/0xbf0 fs/read_write.c:530
> > freader_fetch+0x1d7/0x9d0 lib/buildid.c:100
> > __build_id_parse.isra.0+0xdd/0x6c0 lib/buildid.c:297
> > do_procmap_query+0xb0e/0x1080 fs/proc/task_mmu.c:733
> > procfs_procmap_ioctl+0x9d/0xe0 fs/proc/task_mmu.c:813
> > vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline]
> > __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:597 [inline]
> > __se_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:583 [inline]
> > __x64_sys_ioctl+0x18e/0x210 fs/ioctl.c:583
> > do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline]
> > do_syscall_64+0xcd/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94
> > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
> > RIP: 0033:0x7ff1a238f7c9
> > Code: ff ff c3 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 0f 1f 40 00 48 89 f8 48 89 f7 48 89 d6 48 89 ca 4d 89 c2 4d 89 c8 4c 8b 4c 24 08 0f 05 <48> 3d 01 f0 ff ff 73 01 c3 48 c7 c1 a8 ff ff ff f7 d8 64 89 01 48
> > RSP: 002b:00007ffebbe538b8 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000010
> > RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00007ff1a25e5fa0 RCX: 00007ff1a238f7c9
> > RDX: 0000200000000180 RSI: 00000000c0686611 RDI: 0000000000000004
> > RBP: 00007ff1a2413f91 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000
> > R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 0000000000000000
> > R13: 00007ff1a25e5fa0 R14: 00007ff1a25e5fa0 R15: 0000000000000003
> > </TASK>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [syzbot] [block?] possible deadlock in blkdev_read_iter
2026-01-26 17:20 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
@ 2026-01-26 22:33 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2026-01-27 2:22 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Suren Baghdasaryan @ 2026-01-26 22:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Hillf Danton
Cc: syzbot, axboe, linux-block, Lorenzo Stoakes, linux-mm,
linux-kernel, syzkaller-bugs, Andrii Nakryiko
On Mon, Jan 26, 2026 at 9:20 AM Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jan 24, 2026 at 3:32 AM Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com> wrote:
> >
> > Add Lorenzo and Suren
>
> Thanks!
>
> >
> > > Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2026 15:14:36 -0800
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > syzbot found the following issue on:
> > >
> > > HEAD commit: 24d479d26b25 Linux 6.19-rc6
> > > git tree: upstream
> > > console output: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/log.txt?x=100033fa580000
> > > kernel config: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/.config?x=1859476832863c41
> > > dashboard link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=4e70c8e0a2017b432f7a
> > > compiler: gcc (Debian 12.2.0-14+deb12u1) 12.2.0, GNU ld (GNU Binutils for Debian) 2.40
> > > syz repro: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/repro.syz?x=11451b9a580000
> > > C reproducer: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/repro.c?x=1045e852580000
> > >
> > > Downloadable assets:
> > > disk image (non-bootable): https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/d900f083ada3/non_bootable_disk-24d479d2.raw.xz
> > > vmlinux: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/d0f3c47f6869/vmlinux-24d479d2.xz
> > > kernel image: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/800231513703/bzImage-24d479d2.xz
> > >
> > > IMPORTANT: if you fix the issue, please add the following tag to the commit:
> > > Reported-by: syzbot+4e70c8e0a2017b432f7a@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
> > >
> > > WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
> > > syzkaller #0 Not tainted
> > > ------------------------------------------------------
> > > syz.0.17/6091 is trying to acquire lock:
> > > ffff8881061287a8 (
> > > &sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8){++++}-{4:4}, at: inode_lock_shared include/linux/fs.h:1042 [inline]
> > > &sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8){++++}-{4:4}, at: blkdev_read_iter+0x19e/0x500 block/fops.c:855
> > >
> > > but task is already holding lock:
> > > ffff888012aa0448 (vm_lock){++++}-{0:0}, at: lock_next_vma+0x10e/0xed0 mm/mmap_lock.c:334
> > >
> > > which lock already depends on the new lock.
> > >
> > >
> > > the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
> > >
> > > -> #2 (vm_lock){++++}-{0:0}:
> > > __vma_enter_locked+0x260/0x770 mm/mmap_lock.c:72
> > > __vma_start_write+0x21/0x160 mm/mmap_lock.c:104
> > > vma_start_write include/linux/mmap_lock.h:213 [inline]
> > > mprotect_fixup+0x4e3/0xb80 mm/mprotect.c:768
> > > setup_arg_pages+0x4a2/0xbb0 fs/exec.c:670
> > > load_elf_binary+0xb5b/0x4fe0 fs/binfmt_elf.c:1028
> > > search_binary_handler fs/exec.c:1669 [inline]
> > > exec_binprm fs/exec.c:1701 [inline]
> > > bprm_execve fs/exec.c:1753 [inline]
> > > bprm_execve+0x8c2/0x1620 fs/exec.c:1729
> > > kernel_execve+0x2ef/0x3b0 fs/exec.c:1919
> > > try_to_run_init_process init/main.c:1506 [inline]
> > > kernel_init+0x14a/0x2b0 init/main.c:1634
> > > ret_from_fork+0x983/0xb10 arch/x86/kernel/process.c:158
> > > ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30 arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:246
> > >
> > > -> #1 (&mm->mmap_lock){++++}-{4:4}:
> > > __might_fault mm/memory.c:7174 [inline]
> > > __might_fault+0x113/0x190 mm/memory.c:7168
> > > _copy_to_iter+0x1c2/0x1710 lib/iov_iter.c:196
> > > copy_page_to_iter lib/iov_iter.c:374 [inline]
> > > copy_page_to_iter+0x12a/0x1e0 lib/iov_iter.c:361
> > > copy_folio_to_iter include/linux/uio.h:204 [inline]
> > > filemap_read+0x6b1/0xe40 mm/filemap.c:2851
> > > blkdev_read_iter+0x1ac/0x500 block/fops.c:856
> > > new_sync_read fs/read_write.c:491 [inline]
> > > vfs_read+0x8bf/0xcf0 fs/read_write.c:572
> > > ksys_read+0x12a/0x250 fs/read_write.c:715
> > > do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline]
> > > do_syscall_64+0xcd/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94
> > > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
> > >
> > > -> #0 (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8){++++}-{4:4}:
> > > check_prev_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3165 [inline]
> > > check_prevs_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3284 [inline]
> > > validate_chain kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3908 [inline]
> > > __lock_acquire+0x1669/0x2890 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5237
> > > lock_acquire kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5868 [inline]
> > > lock_acquire+0x179/0x330 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5825
> > > down_read+0x9b/0x460 kernel/locking/rwsem.c:1537
> > > inode_lock_shared include/linux/fs.h:1042 [inline]
> > > blkdev_read_iter+0x19e/0x500 block/fops.c:855
> > > __kernel_read+0x3f3/0xbf0 fs/read_write.c:530
> > > freader_fetch+0x1d7/0x9d0 lib/buildid.c:100
> > > __build_id_parse.isra.0+0xdd/0x6c0 lib/buildid.c:297
> > > do_procmap_query+0xb0e/0x1080 fs/proc/task_mmu.c:733
> > > procfs_procmap_ioctl+0x9d/0xe0 fs/proc/task_mmu.c:813
> > > vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline]
> > > __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:597 [inline]
> > > __se_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:583 [inline]
> > > __x64_sys_ioctl+0x18e/0x210 fs/ioctl.c:583
> > > do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline]
> > > do_syscall_64+0xcd/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94
> > > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
> > >
>
> It looks like:
> #0 is executing PROCMAP_QUERY ioclt, read-locks vm_lock and then calls
> build_id_parse()->__build_id_parse(...,
> may_fault=true)->__kernel_read() which eventually takes
> inode->i_rwsem.
> #1 is a file-backed page fault which asserts that it might take
> mmap_lock for read.
> #2 is load_elf_binary()->mprotect_fixup() which write-locks both
> mmap_lock and vm_lock. I'm guessing it already holds inode->i_rwsem
> before write-locking these locks.
>
> Originally I thought the issue is most liley introduced in
> d9d1c2d81797 ("fs/proc/task_mmu: execute PROCMAP_QUERY ioctl under
> per-vma locks"). But if #2 indeed takes inode->i_rwsem before
> write-locking mmap_lock, then the problem should exist even before
> that change when we didn't use vm_lock and relied on mmap_lock...
>
> I'll try to analyze this more before attempting a fix.
I was able to reproduce the same issue even after reverting
d9d1c2d81797. The deadlock in this case is simpler and involves
mmap_lock instead of vm_lock (see below).
Looks like the race is between the read() syscall and do_procmap_query().
I'll continue investigating, in the meantime CC'ing Andrii.
[ 62.320932][ T9229]
[ 62.321471][ T9229] ======================================================
[ 62.323016][ T9229] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
[ 62.324618][ T9229] 6.19.0-rc6-00001-g40bea6261b2a #42 Not tainted
[ 62.326013][ T9229] ------------------------------------------------------
[ 62.327560][ T9229] hillf/9229 is trying to acquire lock:
[ 62.328821][ T9229] ffff888145b7b5a8
(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8){++++}-{4:4}, at:
blkdev_read_iter+0x2a7/0x4e0
[ 62.331102][ T9229]
[ 62.331102][ T9229] but task is already holding lock:
[ 62.332722][ T9229] ffff888183a6e540 (&mm->mmap_lock){++++}-{4:4},
at: do_procmap_query+0x39f/0x1050
[ 62.334795][ T9229]
[ 62.334795][ T9229] which lock already depends on the new lock.
[ 62.334795][ T9229]
[ 62.337072][ T9229]
[ 62.337072][ T9229] the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
[ 62.338998][ T9229]
[ 62.338998][ T9229] -> #1 (&mm->mmap_lock){++++}-{4:4}:
[ 62.340646][ T9229] __might_fault+0xed/0x170
[ 62.341763][ T9229] _copy_to_iter+0x118/0x1720
[ 62.342913][ T9229] copy_page_to_iter+0x12d/0x1e0
[ 62.344167][ T9229] filemap_read+0x720/0x10a0
[ 62.345298][ T9229] blkdev_read_iter+0x2b5/0x4e0
[ 62.346480][ T9229] vfs_read+0x7f4/0xae0
[ 62.347518][ T9229] ksys_read+0x12a/0x250
[ 62.348584][ T9229] do_syscall_64+0xcb/0xf80
[ 62.349707][ T9229] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
[ 62.351116][ T9229]
[ 62.351116][ T9229] -> #0 (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8){++++}-{4:4}:
[ 62.353012][ T9229] __lock_acquire+0x1509/0x26d0
[ 62.354213][ T9229] lock_acquire+0x185/0x340
[ 62.355323][ T9229] down_read+0x98/0x490
[ 62.356441][ T9229] blkdev_read_iter+0x2a7/0x4e0
[ 62.357619][ T9229] __kernel_read+0x39a/0xa90
[ 62.358767][ T9229] freader_fetch+0x1d5/0xa80
[ 62.359927][ T9229] __build_id_parse.isra.0+0xea/0x6a0
[ 62.361232][ T9229] do_procmap_query+0xd75/0x1050
[ 62.362434][ T9229] procfs_procmap_ioctl+0x7a/0xb0
[ 62.363687][ T9229] __x64_sys_ioctl+0x18e/0x210
[ 62.364863][ T9229] do_syscall_64+0xcb/0xf80
[ 62.365977][ T9229] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
[ 62.367394][ T9229]
[ 62.367394][ T9229] other info that might help us debug this:
[ 62.367394][ T9229]
[ 62.369637][ T9229] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
[ 62.369637][ T9229]
[ 62.371237][ T9229] CPU0 CPU1
[ 62.372441][ T9229] ---- ----
[ 62.373687][ T9229] rlock(&mm->mmap_lock);
[ 62.374688][ T9229]
lock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8);
[ 62.376444][ T9229] lock(&mm->mmap_lock);
[ 62.377956][ T9229] rlock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8);
[ 62.379165][ T9229]
[ 62.379165][ T9229] *** DEADLOCK ***
[ 62.379165][ T9229]
[ 62.380952][ T9229] 1 lock held by hillf/9229:
[ 62.381971][ T9229] #0: ffff888183a6e540
(&mm->mmap_lock){++++}-{4:4}, at: do_procmap_query+0x39f/0x1050
[ 62.384162][ T9229]
[ 62.384162][ T9229] stack backtrace:
[ 62.385458][ T9229] CPU: 3 UID: 0 PID: 9229 Comm: hillf Not tainted
6.19.0-rc6-00001-g40bea6261b2a #42 PREEMPT(full)
[ 62.385471][ T9229] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX,
1996), BIOS 1.17.0-debian-1.17.0-1 04/01/2014
[ 62.385477][ T9229] Call Trace:
[ 62.385482][ T9229] <TASK>
[ 62.385487][ T9229] dump_stack_lvl+0x100/0x190
[ 62.385505][ T9229] print_circular_bug.cold+0x185/0x1d5
[ 62.385521][ T9229] check_noncircular+0x14a/0x170
[ 62.385534][ T9229] __lock_acquire+0x1509/0x26d0
[ 62.385547][ T9229] lock_acquire+0x185/0x340
[ 62.385557][ T9229] ? blkdev_read_iter+0x2a7/0x4e0
[ 62.385569][ T9229] ? __pfx___might_resched+0x10/0x10
[ 62.385583][ T9229] down_read+0x98/0x490
[ 62.385593][ T9229] ? blkdev_read_iter+0x2a7/0x4e0
[ 62.385603][ T9229] ? __pfx_down_read+0x10/0x10
[ 62.385612][ T9229] ? lock_acquire+0x185/0x340
[ 62.385622][ T9229] ? is_bpf_text_address+0x25/0x1a0
[ 62.385634][ T9229] blkdev_read_iter+0x2a7/0x4e0
[ 62.385645][ T9229] __kernel_read+0x39a/0xa90
[ 62.385658][ T9229] ? __pfx___kernel_read+0x10/0x10
[ 62.385671][ T9229] ? __lock_acquire+0x481/0x26d0
[ 62.385683][ T9229] freader_fetch+0x1d5/0xa80
[ 62.385697][ T9229] ? find_held_lock+0x2b/0x80
[ 62.385712][ T9229] ? __pfx_freader_fetch+0x10/0x10
[ 62.385725][ T9229] ? __asan_memset+0x27/0x50
[ 62.385737][ T9229] __build_id_parse.isra.0+0xea/0x6a0
[ 62.385751][ T9229] ? __pfx___build_id_parse.isra.0+0x10/0x10
[ 62.385766][ T9229] ? __pfx_find_vma+0x10/0x10
[ 62.385774][ T9229] ? __might_fault+0x129/0x170
[ 62.385788][ T9229] do_procmap_query+0xd75/0x1050
[ 62.385798][ T9229] ? __pfx_do_procmap_query+0x10/0x10
[ 62.385807][ T9229] ? __sanitizer_cov_trace_switch+0x53/0x90
[ 62.385817][ T9229] ? do_vfs_ioctl+0x226/0x13b0
[ 62.385828][ T9229] ? __pfx_do_vfs_ioctl+0x10/0x10
[ 62.385839][ T9229] ? putname+0xfc/0x1b0
[ 62.385846][ T9229] ? putname+0x101/0x1b0
[ 62.385857][ T9229] ? __x64_sys_openat+0x143/0x210
[ 62.385867][ T9229] procfs_procmap_ioctl+0x7a/0xb0
[ 62.385877][ T9229] ? __pfx_procfs_procmap_ioctl+0x10/0x10
[ 62.385888][ T9229] __x64_sys_ioctl+0x18e/0x210
[ 62.385899][ T9229] do_syscall_64+0xcb/0xf80
[ 62.385913][ T9229] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
[ 62.385923][ T9229] RIP: 0033:0x412209
[ 62.385931][ T9229] Code: c0 79 93 eb d5 48 8d 7c 1d 00 eb 99 0f 1f
44 00 00 48 89 f8 48 89 f7 48 89 d6 48 89 ca 4d 89 c2 4d 89 c8 4c 8b
4c 24 08 0f 05 <48> 3d 01 f0 ff ff 73 01 c3 48 c7 c1 d8 ff ff ff f7 d8
64 89 01 48
[ 62.385940][ T9229] RSP: 002b:00007fff380d5588 EFLAGS: 00000217
ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000010
[ 62.385950][ T9229] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00007fff380d56c8
RCX: 0000000000412209
[ 62.385956][ T9229] RDX: 0000200000000180 RSI: 00000000c0686611
RDI: 0000000000000004
[ 62.385962][ T9229] RBP: 00007fff380d55a0 R08: 0000000000000000
R09: 00007fff380d5640
[ 62.385968][ T9229] R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000217
R12: 00007fff380d56b8
[ 62.385974][ T9229] R13: 0000000000000002 R14: 00000000004a0e40
R15: 0000000000000002
[ 62.385982][ T9229] </TASK>
>
> > > other info that might help us debug this:
> > >
> > > Chain exists of:
> > > &sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8 --> &mm->mmap_lock --> vm_lock
> > >
> > > Possible unsafe locking scenario:
> > >
> > > CPU0 CPU1
> > > ---- ----
> > > rlock(vm_lock);
> > > lock(&mm->mmap_lock);
> > > lock(vm_lock);
> > > rlock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8);
> > >
> > > *** DEADLOCK ***
> > >
> > > 1 lock held by syz.0.17/6091:
> > > #0: ffff888012aa0448 (vm_lock){++++}-{0:0}, at: lock_next_vma+0x10e/0xed0 mm/mmap_lock.c:334
> > >
> > > stack backtrace:
> > > CPU: 2 UID: 0 PID: 6091 Comm: syz.0.17 Not tainted syzkaller #0 PREEMPT(full)
> > > Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 1.16.3-debian-1.16.3-2~bpo12+1 04/01/2014
> > > Call Trace:
> > > <TASK>
> > > __dump_stack lib/dump_stack.c:94 [inline]
> > > dump_stack_lvl+0x116/0x1f0 lib/dump_stack.c:120
> > > print_circular_bug+0x275/0x340 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:2043
> > > check_noncircular+0x146/0x160 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:2175
> > > check_prev_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3165 [inline]
> > > check_prevs_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3284 [inline]
> > > validate_chain kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3908 [inline]
> > > __lock_acquire+0x1669/0x2890 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5237
> > > lock_acquire kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5868 [inline]
> > > lock_acquire+0x179/0x330 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5825
> > > down_read+0x9b/0x460 kernel/locking/rwsem.c:1537
> > > inode_lock_shared include/linux/fs.h:1042 [inline]
> > > blkdev_read_iter+0x19e/0x500 block/fops.c:855
> > > __kernel_read+0x3f3/0xbf0 fs/read_write.c:530
> > > freader_fetch+0x1d7/0x9d0 lib/buildid.c:100
> > > __build_id_parse.isra.0+0xdd/0x6c0 lib/buildid.c:297
> > > do_procmap_query+0xb0e/0x1080 fs/proc/task_mmu.c:733
> > > procfs_procmap_ioctl+0x9d/0xe0 fs/proc/task_mmu.c:813
> > > vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline]
> > > __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:597 [inline]
> > > __se_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:583 [inline]
> > > __x64_sys_ioctl+0x18e/0x210 fs/ioctl.c:583
> > > do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline]
> > > do_syscall_64+0xcd/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94
> > > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
> > > RIP: 0033:0x7ff1a238f7c9
> > > Code: ff ff c3 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 0f 1f 40 00 48 89 f8 48 89 f7 48 89 d6 48 89 ca 4d 89 c2 4d 89 c8 4c 8b 4c 24 08 0f 05 <48> 3d 01 f0 ff ff 73 01 c3 48 c7 c1 a8 ff ff ff f7 d8 64 89 01 48
> > > RSP: 002b:00007ffebbe538b8 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000010
> > > RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00007ff1a25e5fa0 RCX: 00007ff1a238f7c9
> > > RDX: 0000200000000180 RSI: 00000000c0686611 RDI: 0000000000000004
> > > RBP: 00007ff1a2413f91 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000
> > > R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 0000000000000000
> > > R13: 00007ff1a25e5fa0 R14: 00007ff1a25e5fa0 R15: 0000000000000003
> > > </TASK>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [syzbot] [block?] possible deadlock in blkdev_read_iter
2026-01-26 22:33 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
@ 2026-01-27 2:22 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2026-01-27 18:51 ` Andrii Nakryiko
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Suren Baghdasaryan @ 2026-01-27 2:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Hillf Danton
Cc: syzbot, axboe, linux-block, Lorenzo Stoakes, linux-mm,
linux-kernel, syzkaller-bugs, Andrii Nakryiko
On Mon, Jan 26, 2026 at 2:33 PM Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 26, 2026 at 9:20 AM Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Jan 24, 2026 at 3:32 AM Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Add Lorenzo and Suren
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > >
> > > > Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2026 15:14:36 -0800
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > syzbot found the following issue on:
> > > >
> > > > HEAD commit: 24d479d26b25 Linux 6.19-rc6
> > > > git tree: upstream
> > > > console output: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/log.txt?x=100033fa580000
> > > > kernel config: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/.config?x=1859476832863c41
> > > > dashboard link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=4e70c8e0a2017b432f7a
> > > > compiler: gcc (Debian 12.2.0-14+deb12u1) 12.2.0, GNU ld (GNU Binutils for Debian) 2.40
> > > > syz repro: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/repro.syz?x=11451b9a580000
> > > > C reproducer: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/repro.c?x=1045e852580000
> > > >
> > > > Downloadable assets:
> > > > disk image (non-bootable): https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/d900f083ada3/non_bootable_disk-24d479d2.raw.xz
> > > > vmlinux: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/d0f3c47f6869/vmlinux-24d479d2.xz
> > > > kernel image: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/800231513703/bzImage-24d479d2.xz
> > > >
> > > > IMPORTANT: if you fix the issue, please add the following tag to the commit:
> > > > Reported-by: syzbot+4e70c8e0a2017b432f7a@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
> > > >
> > > > WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
> > > > syzkaller #0 Not tainted
> > > > ------------------------------------------------------
> > > > syz.0.17/6091 is trying to acquire lock:
> > > > ffff8881061287a8 (
> > > > &sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8){++++}-{4:4}, at: inode_lock_shared include/linux/fs.h:1042 [inline]
> > > > &sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8){++++}-{4:4}, at: blkdev_read_iter+0x19e/0x500 block/fops.c:855
> > > >
> > > > but task is already holding lock:
> > > > ffff888012aa0448 (vm_lock){++++}-{0:0}, at: lock_next_vma+0x10e/0xed0 mm/mmap_lock.c:334
> > > >
> > > > which lock already depends on the new lock.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
> > > >
> > > > -> #2 (vm_lock){++++}-{0:0}:
> > > > __vma_enter_locked+0x260/0x770 mm/mmap_lock.c:72
> > > > __vma_start_write+0x21/0x160 mm/mmap_lock.c:104
> > > > vma_start_write include/linux/mmap_lock.h:213 [inline]
> > > > mprotect_fixup+0x4e3/0xb80 mm/mprotect.c:768
> > > > setup_arg_pages+0x4a2/0xbb0 fs/exec.c:670
> > > > load_elf_binary+0xb5b/0x4fe0 fs/binfmt_elf.c:1028
> > > > search_binary_handler fs/exec.c:1669 [inline]
> > > > exec_binprm fs/exec.c:1701 [inline]
> > > > bprm_execve fs/exec.c:1753 [inline]
> > > > bprm_execve+0x8c2/0x1620 fs/exec.c:1729
> > > > kernel_execve+0x2ef/0x3b0 fs/exec.c:1919
> > > > try_to_run_init_process init/main.c:1506 [inline]
> > > > kernel_init+0x14a/0x2b0 init/main.c:1634
> > > > ret_from_fork+0x983/0xb10 arch/x86/kernel/process.c:158
> > > > ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30 arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:246
> > > >
> > > > -> #1 (&mm->mmap_lock){++++}-{4:4}:
> > > > __might_fault mm/memory.c:7174 [inline]
> > > > __might_fault+0x113/0x190 mm/memory.c:7168
> > > > _copy_to_iter+0x1c2/0x1710 lib/iov_iter.c:196
> > > > copy_page_to_iter lib/iov_iter.c:374 [inline]
> > > > copy_page_to_iter+0x12a/0x1e0 lib/iov_iter.c:361
> > > > copy_folio_to_iter include/linux/uio.h:204 [inline]
> > > > filemap_read+0x6b1/0xe40 mm/filemap.c:2851
> > > > blkdev_read_iter+0x1ac/0x500 block/fops.c:856
> > > > new_sync_read fs/read_write.c:491 [inline]
> > > > vfs_read+0x8bf/0xcf0 fs/read_write.c:572
> > > > ksys_read+0x12a/0x250 fs/read_write.c:715
> > > > do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline]
> > > > do_syscall_64+0xcd/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94
> > > > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
> > > >
> > > > -> #0 (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8){++++}-{4:4}:
> > > > check_prev_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3165 [inline]
> > > > check_prevs_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3284 [inline]
> > > > validate_chain kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3908 [inline]
> > > > __lock_acquire+0x1669/0x2890 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5237
> > > > lock_acquire kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5868 [inline]
> > > > lock_acquire+0x179/0x330 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5825
> > > > down_read+0x9b/0x460 kernel/locking/rwsem.c:1537
> > > > inode_lock_shared include/linux/fs.h:1042 [inline]
> > > > blkdev_read_iter+0x19e/0x500 block/fops.c:855
> > > > __kernel_read+0x3f3/0xbf0 fs/read_write.c:530
> > > > freader_fetch+0x1d7/0x9d0 lib/buildid.c:100
> > > > __build_id_parse.isra.0+0xdd/0x6c0 lib/buildid.c:297
> > > > do_procmap_query+0xb0e/0x1080 fs/proc/task_mmu.c:733
> > > > procfs_procmap_ioctl+0x9d/0xe0 fs/proc/task_mmu.c:813
> > > > vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline]
> > > > __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:597 [inline]
> > > > __se_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:583 [inline]
> > > > __x64_sys_ioctl+0x18e/0x210 fs/ioctl.c:583
> > > > do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline]
> > > > do_syscall_64+0xcd/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94
> > > > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
> > > >
> >
> > It looks like:
> > #0 is executing PROCMAP_QUERY ioclt, read-locks vm_lock and then calls
> > build_id_parse()->__build_id_parse(...,
> > may_fault=true)->__kernel_read() which eventually takes
> > inode->i_rwsem.
> > #1 is a file-backed page fault which asserts that it might take
> > mmap_lock for read.
> > #2 is load_elf_binary()->mprotect_fixup() which write-locks both
> > mmap_lock and vm_lock. I'm guessing it already holds inode->i_rwsem
> > before write-locking these locks.
> >
> > Originally I thought the issue is most liley introduced in
> > d9d1c2d81797 ("fs/proc/task_mmu: execute PROCMAP_QUERY ioctl under
> > per-vma locks"). But if #2 indeed takes inode->i_rwsem before
> > write-locking mmap_lock, then the problem should exist even before
> > that change when we didn't use vm_lock and relied on mmap_lock...
> >
> > I'll try to analyze this more before attempting a fix.
>
> I was able to reproduce the same issue even after reverting
> d9d1c2d81797. The deadlock in this case is simpler and involves
> mmap_lock instead of vm_lock (see below).
> Looks like the race is between the read() syscall and do_procmap_query().
> I'll continue investigating, in the meantime CC'ing Andrii.
So, here is a cleaner version of that report (with d9d1c2d81797 reverted):
-> #1 (&mm->mmap_lock){++++}-{4:4}:
__might_fault+0xed/0x170
_copy_to_iter+0x118/0x1720
copy_page_to_iter+0x12d/0x1e0
filemap_read+0x720/0x10a0
blkdev_read_iter+0x2b5/0x4e0
vfs_read+0x7f4/0xae0
ksys_read+0x12a/0x250
do_syscall_64+0xcb/0xf80
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
-> #0 (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8){++++}-{4:4}:
__lock_acquire+0x1509/0x26d0
lock_acquire+0x185/0x340
down_read+0x98/0x490
blkdev_read_iter+0x2a7/0x4e0
__kernel_read+0x39a/0xa90
freader_fetch+0x1d5/0xa80
__build_id_parse.isra.0+0xea/0x6a0
do_procmap_query+0xd75/0x1050
procfs_procmap_ioctl+0x7a/0xb0
__x64_sys_ioctl+0x18e/0x210
do_syscall_64+0xcb/0xf80
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
other info that might help us debug this:
Possible unsafe locking scenario:
CPU0 CPU1
---- ----
rlock(&mm->mmap_lock);
lock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8);
lock(&mm->mmap_lock);
rlock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8);
*** DEADLOCK ***
Both threads are calling blkdev_read_iter(), which uses
inode_lock_shared() to read-lock inode->i_rwsem. I'm not sure why CPU1
shows lock() instead of rlock(). So both threads read-lock
inode->i_rwsem and mmap_lock but in a different order. IIUC, with
read-locks this should not deadlock until some other thread
write-locks the mmap_lock in between and this becomes a real deadlock:
CPU0 CPU1 CPU2
---- ---- ----
rlock(&mm->mmap_lock);
rlock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8);
wlock(&mm->mmap_lock) <-- waiting for CPU0
rlock(&mm->mmap_lock); <-- waiting for CPU1
rlock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8); <-- waiting for CPU2
I believe in the original report this write-locking thread was the one
calling mprotect_fixup().
Per https://docs.kernel.org/mm/process_addrs.html#lock-ordering,
inode->i_rwsem should be locked before mm->mmap_lock, so
procfs_procmap_ioctl() has to be fixed to follow this lock ordering.
One possibility I can think of is to use build_id_parse_nofault()
first and if it fails because the required page is not faulted, we do
freader_init_from_file(), then drop the mmap/vma lock and execute
freader_fetch() outside of these locks to fault in that page. Once
that's done, we'll retry the whole operation and this time
build_id_parse_nofault() should pass (unless we already evicted that
page, which is extremely unlikely and in that case, we'll retry
again).
I tried a POC with build_id_parse_nofault() but without the whole
dance with freader_init_from_file/freader_fetch and the deadlock is
gone. Andrii, WDYT?
>
> [ 62.320932][ T9229]
> [ 62.321471][ T9229] ======================================================
> [ 62.323016][ T9229] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
> [ 62.324618][ T9229] 6.19.0-rc6-00001-g40bea6261b2a #42 Not tainted
> [ 62.326013][ T9229] ------------------------------------------------------
> [ 62.327560][ T9229] hillf/9229 is trying to acquire lock:
> [ 62.328821][ T9229] ffff888145b7b5a8
> (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8){++++}-{4:4}, at:
> blkdev_read_iter+0x2a7/0x4e0
> [ 62.331102][ T9229]
> [ 62.331102][ T9229] but task is already holding lock:
> [ 62.332722][ T9229] ffff888183a6e540 (&mm->mmap_lock){++++}-{4:4},
> at: do_procmap_query+0x39f/0x1050
> [ 62.334795][ T9229]
> [ 62.334795][ T9229] which lock already depends on the new lock.
> [ 62.334795][ T9229]
> [ 62.337072][ T9229]
> [ 62.337072][ T9229] the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
> [ 62.338998][ T9229]
> [ 62.338998][ T9229] -> #1 (&mm->mmap_lock){++++}-{4:4}:
> [ 62.340646][ T9229] __might_fault+0xed/0x170
> [ 62.341763][ T9229] _copy_to_iter+0x118/0x1720
> [ 62.342913][ T9229] copy_page_to_iter+0x12d/0x1e0
> [ 62.344167][ T9229] filemap_read+0x720/0x10a0
> [ 62.345298][ T9229] blkdev_read_iter+0x2b5/0x4e0
> [ 62.346480][ T9229] vfs_read+0x7f4/0xae0
> [ 62.347518][ T9229] ksys_read+0x12a/0x250
> [ 62.348584][ T9229] do_syscall_64+0xcb/0xf80
> [ 62.349707][ T9229] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
> [ 62.351116][ T9229]
> [ 62.351116][ T9229] -> #0 (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8){++++}-{4:4}:
> [ 62.353012][ T9229] __lock_acquire+0x1509/0x26d0
> [ 62.354213][ T9229] lock_acquire+0x185/0x340
> [ 62.355323][ T9229] down_read+0x98/0x490
> [ 62.356441][ T9229] blkdev_read_iter+0x2a7/0x4e0
> [ 62.357619][ T9229] __kernel_read+0x39a/0xa90
> [ 62.358767][ T9229] freader_fetch+0x1d5/0xa80
> [ 62.359927][ T9229] __build_id_parse.isra.0+0xea/0x6a0
> [ 62.361232][ T9229] do_procmap_query+0xd75/0x1050
> [ 62.362434][ T9229] procfs_procmap_ioctl+0x7a/0xb0
> [ 62.363687][ T9229] __x64_sys_ioctl+0x18e/0x210
> [ 62.364863][ T9229] do_syscall_64+0xcb/0xf80
> [ 62.365977][ T9229] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
> [ 62.367394][ T9229]
> [ 62.367394][ T9229] other info that might help us debug this:
> [ 62.367394][ T9229]
> [ 62.369637][ T9229] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
> [ 62.369637][ T9229]
> [ 62.371237][ T9229] CPU0 CPU1
> [ 62.372441][ T9229] ---- ----
> [ 62.373687][ T9229] rlock(&mm->mmap_lock);
> [ 62.374688][ T9229]
> lock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8);
> [ 62.376444][ T9229] lock(&mm->mmap_lock);
> [ 62.377956][ T9229] rlock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8);
> [ 62.379165][ T9229]
> [ 62.379165][ T9229] *** DEADLOCK ***
> [ 62.379165][ T9229]
> [ 62.380952][ T9229] 1 lock held by hillf/9229:
> [ 62.381971][ T9229] #0: ffff888183a6e540
> (&mm->mmap_lock){++++}-{4:4}, at: do_procmap_query+0x39f/0x1050
> [ 62.384162][ T9229]
> [ 62.384162][ T9229] stack backtrace:
> [ 62.385458][ T9229] CPU: 3 UID: 0 PID: 9229 Comm: hillf Not tainted
> 6.19.0-rc6-00001-g40bea6261b2a #42 PREEMPT(full)
> [ 62.385471][ T9229] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX,
> 1996), BIOS 1.17.0-debian-1.17.0-1 04/01/2014
> [ 62.385477][ T9229] Call Trace:
> [ 62.385482][ T9229] <TASK>
> [ 62.385487][ T9229] dump_stack_lvl+0x100/0x190
> [ 62.385505][ T9229] print_circular_bug.cold+0x185/0x1d5
> [ 62.385521][ T9229] check_noncircular+0x14a/0x170
> [ 62.385534][ T9229] __lock_acquire+0x1509/0x26d0
> [ 62.385547][ T9229] lock_acquire+0x185/0x340
> [ 62.385557][ T9229] ? blkdev_read_iter+0x2a7/0x4e0
> [ 62.385569][ T9229] ? __pfx___might_resched+0x10/0x10
> [ 62.385583][ T9229] down_read+0x98/0x490
> [ 62.385593][ T9229] ? blkdev_read_iter+0x2a7/0x4e0
> [ 62.385603][ T9229] ? __pfx_down_read+0x10/0x10
> [ 62.385612][ T9229] ? lock_acquire+0x185/0x340
> [ 62.385622][ T9229] ? is_bpf_text_address+0x25/0x1a0
> [ 62.385634][ T9229] blkdev_read_iter+0x2a7/0x4e0
> [ 62.385645][ T9229] __kernel_read+0x39a/0xa90
> [ 62.385658][ T9229] ? __pfx___kernel_read+0x10/0x10
> [ 62.385671][ T9229] ? __lock_acquire+0x481/0x26d0
> [ 62.385683][ T9229] freader_fetch+0x1d5/0xa80
> [ 62.385697][ T9229] ? find_held_lock+0x2b/0x80
> [ 62.385712][ T9229] ? __pfx_freader_fetch+0x10/0x10
> [ 62.385725][ T9229] ? __asan_memset+0x27/0x50
> [ 62.385737][ T9229] __build_id_parse.isra.0+0xea/0x6a0
> [ 62.385751][ T9229] ? __pfx___build_id_parse.isra.0+0x10/0x10
> [ 62.385766][ T9229] ? __pfx_find_vma+0x10/0x10
> [ 62.385774][ T9229] ? __might_fault+0x129/0x170
> [ 62.385788][ T9229] do_procmap_query+0xd75/0x1050
> [ 62.385798][ T9229] ? __pfx_do_procmap_query+0x10/0x10
> [ 62.385807][ T9229] ? __sanitizer_cov_trace_switch+0x53/0x90
> [ 62.385817][ T9229] ? do_vfs_ioctl+0x226/0x13b0
> [ 62.385828][ T9229] ? __pfx_do_vfs_ioctl+0x10/0x10
> [ 62.385839][ T9229] ? putname+0xfc/0x1b0
> [ 62.385846][ T9229] ? putname+0x101/0x1b0
> [ 62.385857][ T9229] ? __x64_sys_openat+0x143/0x210
> [ 62.385867][ T9229] procfs_procmap_ioctl+0x7a/0xb0
> [ 62.385877][ T9229] ? __pfx_procfs_procmap_ioctl+0x10/0x10
> [ 62.385888][ T9229] __x64_sys_ioctl+0x18e/0x210
> [ 62.385899][ T9229] do_syscall_64+0xcb/0xf80
> [ 62.385913][ T9229] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
> [ 62.385923][ T9229] RIP: 0033:0x412209
> [ 62.385931][ T9229] Code: c0 79 93 eb d5 48 8d 7c 1d 00 eb 99 0f 1f
> 44 00 00 48 89 f8 48 89 f7 48 89 d6 48 89 ca 4d 89 c2 4d 89 c8 4c 8b
> 4c 24 08 0f 05 <48> 3d 01 f0 ff ff 73 01 c3 48 c7 c1 d8 ff ff ff f7 d8
> 64 89 01 48
> [ 62.385940][ T9229] RSP: 002b:00007fff380d5588 EFLAGS: 00000217
> ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000010
> [ 62.385950][ T9229] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00007fff380d56c8
> RCX: 0000000000412209
> [ 62.385956][ T9229] RDX: 0000200000000180 RSI: 00000000c0686611
> RDI: 0000000000000004
> [ 62.385962][ T9229] RBP: 00007fff380d55a0 R08: 0000000000000000
> R09: 00007fff380d5640
> [ 62.385968][ T9229] R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000217
> R12: 00007fff380d56b8
> [ 62.385974][ T9229] R13: 0000000000000002 R14: 00000000004a0e40
> R15: 0000000000000002
> [ 62.385982][ T9229] </TASK>
>
>
>
> >
> > > > other info that might help us debug this:
> > > >
> > > > Chain exists of:
> > > > &sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8 --> &mm->mmap_lock --> vm_lock
> > > >
> > > > Possible unsafe locking scenario:
> > > >
> > > > CPU0 CPU1
> > > > ---- ----
> > > > rlock(vm_lock);
> > > > lock(&mm->mmap_lock);
> > > > lock(vm_lock);
> > > > rlock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8);
> > > >
> > > > *** DEADLOCK ***
> > > >
> > > > 1 lock held by syz.0.17/6091:
> > > > #0: ffff888012aa0448 (vm_lock){++++}-{0:0}, at: lock_next_vma+0x10e/0xed0 mm/mmap_lock.c:334
> > > >
> > > > stack backtrace:
> > > > CPU: 2 UID: 0 PID: 6091 Comm: syz.0.17 Not tainted syzkaller #0 PREEMPT(full)
> > > > Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 1.16.3-debian-1.16.3-2~bpo12+1 04/01/2014
> > > > Call Trace:
> > > > <TASK>
> > > > __dump_stack lib/dump_stack.c:94 [inline]
> > > > dump_stack_lvl+0x116/0x1f0 lib/dump_stack.c:120
> > > > print_circular_bug+0x275/0x340 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:2043
> > > > check_noncircular+0x146/0x160 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:2175
> > > > check_prev_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3165 [inline]
> > > > check_prevs_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3284 [inline]
> > > > validate_chain kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3908 [inline]
> > > > __lock_acquire+0x1669/0x2890 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5237
> > > > lock_acquire kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5868 [inline]
> > > > lock_acquire+0x179/0x330 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5825
> > > > down_read+0x9b/0x460 kernel/locking/rwsem.c:1537
> > > > inode_lock_shared include/linux/fs.h:1042 [inline]
> > > > blkdev_read_iter+0x19e/0x500 block/fops.c:855
> > > > __kernel_read+0x3f3/0xbf0 fs/read_write.c:530
> > > > freader_fetch+0x1d7/0x9d0 lib/buildid.c:100
> > > > __build_id_parse.isra.0+0xdd/0x6c0 lib/buildid.c:297
> > > > do_procmap_query+0xb0e/0x1080 fs/proc/task_mmu.c:733
> > > > procfs_procmap_ioctl+0x9d/0xe0 fs/proc/task_mmu.c:813
> > > > vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline]
> > > > __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:597 [inline]
> > > > __se_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:583 [inline]
> > > > __x64_sys_ioctl+0x18e/0x210 fs/ioctl.c:583
> > > > do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline]
> > > > do_syscall_64+0xcd/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94
> > > > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
> > > > RIP: 0033:0x7ff1a238f7c9
> > > > Code: ff ff c3 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 0f 1f 40 00 48 89 f8 48 89 f7 48 89 d6 48 89 ca 4d 89 c2 4d 89 c8 4c 8b 4c 24 08 0f 05 <48> 3d 01 f0 ff ff 73 01 c3 48 c7 c1 a8 ff ff ff f7 d8 64 89 01 48
> > > > RSP: 002b:00007ffebbe538b8 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000010
> > > > RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00007ff1a25e5fa0 RCX: 00007ff1a238f7c9
> > > > RDX: 0000200000000180 RSI: 00000000c0686611 RDI: 0000000000000004
> > > > RBP: 00007ff1a2413f91 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000
> > > > R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 0000000000000000
> > > > R13: 00007ff1a25e5fa0 R14: 00007ff1a25e5fa0 R15: 0000000000000003
> > > > </TASK>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [syzbot] [block?] possible deadlock in blkdev_read_iter
2026-01-27 2:22 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
@ 2026-01-27 18:51 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2026-01-27 23:52 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Andrii Nakryiko @ 2026-01-27 18:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Suren Baghdasaryan
Cc: Hillf Danton, syzbot, axboe, linux-block, Lorenzo Stoakes,
linux-mm, linux-kernel, syzkaller-bugs
On Mon, Jan 26, 2026 at 6:22 PM Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 26, 2026 at 2:33 PM Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 26, 2026 at 9:20 AM Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sat, Jan 24, 2026 at 3:32 AM Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Add Lorenzo and Suren
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > >
> > > >
> > > > > Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2026 15:14:36 -0800
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > >
> > > > > syzbot found the following issue on:
> > > > >
> > > > > HEAD commit: 24d479d26b25 Linux 6.19-rc6
> > > > > git tree: upstream
> > > > > console output: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/log.txt?x=100033fa580000
> > > > > kernel config: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/.config?x=1859476832863c41
> > > > > dashboard link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=4e70c8e0a2017b432f7a
> > > > > compiler: gcc (Debian 12.2.0-14+deb12u1) 12.2.0, GNU ld (GNU Binutils for Debian) 2.40
> > > > > syz repro: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/repro.syz?x=11451b9a580000
> > > > > C reproducer: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/repro.c?x=1045e852580000
> > > > >
> > > > > Downloadable assets:
> > > > > disk image (non-bootable): https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/d900f083ada3/non_bootable_disk-24d479d2.raw.xz
> > > > > vmlinux: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/d0f3c47f6869/vmlinux-24d479d2.xz
> > > > > kernel image: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/800231513703/bzImage-24d479d2.xz
> > > > >
> > > > > IMPORTANT: if you fix the issue, please add the following tag to the commit:
> > > > > Reported-by: syzbot+4e70c8e0a2017b432f7a@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
> > > > >
> > > > > WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
> > > > > syzkaller #0 Not tainted
> > > > > ------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > syz.0.17/6091 is trying to acquire lock:
> > > > > ffff8881061287a8 (
> > > > > &sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8){++++}-{4:4}, at: inode_lock_shared include/linux/fs.h:1042 [inline]
> > > > > &sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8){++++}-{4:4}, at: blkdev_read_iter+0x19e/0x500 block/fops.c:855
> > > > >
> > > > > but task is already holding lock:
> > > > > ffff888012aa0448 (vm_lock){++++}-{0:0}, at: lock_next_vma+0x10e/0xed0 mm/mmap_lock.c:334
> > > > >
> > > > > which lock already depends on the new lock.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
> > > > >
> > > > > -> #2 (vm_lock){++++}-{0:0}:
> > > > > __vma_enter_locked+0x260/0x770 mm/mmap_lock.c:72
> > > > > __vma_start_write+0x21/0x160 mm/mmap_lock.c:104
> > > > > vma_start_write include/linux/mmap_lock.h:213 [inline]
> > > > > mprotect_fixup+0x4e3/0xb80 mm/mprotect.c:768
> > > > > setup_arg_pages+0x4a2/0xbb0 fs/exec.c:670
> > > > > load_elf_binary+0xb5b/0x4fe0 fs/binfmt_elf.c:1028
> > > > > search_binary_handler fs/exec.c:1669 [inline]
> > > > > exec_binprm fs/exec.c:1701 [inline]
> > > > > bprm_execve fs/exec.c:1753 [inline]
> > > > > bprm_execve+0x8c2/0x1620 fs/exec.c:1729
> > > > > kernel_execve+0x2ef/0x3b0 fs/exec.c:1919
> > > > > try_to_run_init_process init/main.c:1506 [inline]
> > > > > kernel_init+0x14a/0x2b0 init/main.c:1634
> > > > > ret_from_fork+0x983/0xb10 arch/x86/kernel/process.c:158
> > > > > ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30 arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:246
> > > > >
> > > > > -> #1 (&mm->mmap_lock){++++}-{4:4}:
> > > > > __might_fault mm/memory.c:7174 [inline]
> > > > > __might_fault+0x113/0x190 mm/memory.c:7168
> > > > > _copy_to_iter+0x1c2/0x1710 lib/iov_iter.c:196
> > > > > copy_page_to_iter lib/iov_iter.c:374 [inline]
> > > > > copy_page_to_iter+0x12a/0x1e0 lib/iov_iter.c:361
> > > > > copy_folio_to_iter include/linux/uio.h:204 [inline]
> > > > > filemap_read+0x6b1/0xe40 mm/filemap.c:2851
> > > > > blkdev_read_iter+0x1ac/0x500 block/fops.c:856
> > > > > new_sync_read fs/read_write.c:491 [inline]
> > > > > vfs_read+0x8bf/0xcf0 fs/read_write.c:572
> > > > > ksys_read+0x12a/0x250 fs/read_write.c:715
> > > > > do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline]
> > > > > do_syscall_64+0xcd/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94
> > > > > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
> > > > >
> > > > > -> #0 (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8){++++}-{4:4}:
> > > > > check_prev_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3165 [inline]
> > > > > check_prevs_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3284 [inline]
> > > > > validate_chain kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3908 [inline]
> > > > > __lock_acquire+0x1669/0x2890 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5237
> > > > > lock_acquire kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5868 [inline]
> > > > > lock_acquire+0x179/0x330 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5825
> > > > > down_read+0x9b/0x460 kernel/locking/rwsem.c:1537
> > > > > inode_lock_shared include/linux/fs.h:1042 [inline]
> > > > > blkdev_read_iter+0x19e/0x500 block/fops.c:855
> > > > > __kernel_read+0x3f3/0xbf0 fs/read_write.c:530
> > > > > freader_fetch+0x1d7/0x9d0 lib/buildid.c:100
> > > > > __build_id_parse.isra.0+0xdd/0x6c0 lib/buildid.c:297
> > > > > do_procmap_query+0xb0e/0x1080 fs/proc/task_mmu.c:733
> > > > > procfs_procmap_ioctl+0x9d/0xe0 fs/proc/task_mmu.c:813
> > > > > vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline]
> > > > > __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:597 [inline]
> > > > > __se_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:583 [inline]
> > > > > __x64_sys_ioctl+0x18e/0x210 fs/ioctl.c:583
> > > > > do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline]
> > > > > do_syscall_64+0xcd/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94
> > > > > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
> > > > >
> > >
> > > It looks like:
> > > #0 is executing PROCMAP_QUERY ioclt, read-locks vm_lock and then calls
> > > build_id_parse()->__build_id_parse(...,
> > > may_fault=true)->__kernel_read() which eventually takes
> > > inode->i_rwsem.
> > > #1 is a file-backed page fault which asserts that it might take
> > > mmap_lock for read.
> > > #2 is load_elf_binary()->mprotect_fixup() which write-locks both
> > > mmap_lock and vm_lock. I'm guessing it already holds inode->i_rwsem
> > > before write-locking these locks.
> > >
> > > Originally I thought the issue is most liley introduced in
> > > d9d1c2d81797 ("fs/proc/task_mmu: execute PROCMAP_QUERY ioctl under
> > > per-vma locks"). But if #2 indeed takes inode->i_rwsem before
> > > write-locking mmap_lock, then the problem should exist even before
> > > that change when we didn't use vm_lock and relied on mmap_lock...
> > >
> > > I'll try to analyze this more before attempting a fix.
> >
> > I was able to reproduce the same issue even after reverting
> > d9d1c2d81797. The deadlock in this case is simpler and involves
> > mmap_lock instead of vm_lock (see below).
> > Looks like the race is between the read() syscall and do_procmap_query().
> > I'll continue investigating, in the meantime CC'ing Andrii.
>
> So, here is a cleaner version of that report (with d9d1c2d81797 reverted):
>
> -> #1 (&mm->mmap_lock){++++}-{4:4}:
> __might_fault+0xed/0x170
> _copy_to_iter+0x118/0x1720
> copy_page_to_iter+0x12d/0x1e0
> filemap_read+0x720/0x10a0
> blkdev_read_iter+0x2b5/0x4e0
> vfs_read+0x7f4/0xae0
> ksys_read+0x12a/0x250
> do_syscall_64+0xcb/0xf80
> entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
>
> -> #0 (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8){++++}-{4:4}:
> __lock_acquire+0x1509/0x26d0
> lock_acquire+0x185/0x340
> down_read+0x98/0x490
> blkdev_read_iter+0x2a7/0x4e0
> __kernel_read+0x39a/0xa90
> freader_fetch+0x1d5/0xa80
> __build_id_parse.isra.0+0xea/0x6a0
> do_procmap_query+0xd75/0x1050
> procfs_procmap_ioctl+0x7a/0xb0
> __x64_sys_ioctl+0x18e/0x210
> do_syscall_64+0xcb/0xf80
> entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
>
> other info that might help us debug this:
>
> Possible unsafe locking scenario:
>
> CPU0 CPU1
> ---- ----
> rlock(&mm->mmap_lock);
> lock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8);
> lock(&mm->mmap_lock);
> rlock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8);
>
> *** DEADLOCK ***
>
> Both threads are calling blkdev_read_iter(), which uses
> inode_lock_shared() to read-lock inode->i_rwsem. I'm not sure why CPU1
> shows lock() instead of rlock(). So both threads read-lock
> inode->i_rwsem and mmap_lock but in a different order. IIUC, with
> read-locks this should not deadlock until some other thread
> write-locks the mmap_lock in between and this becomes a real deadlock:
>
> CPU0 CPU1 CPU2
> ---- ---- ----
> rlock(&mm->mmap_lock);
> rlock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8);
> wlock(&mm->mmap_lock) <-- waiting for CPU0
> rlock(&mm->mmap_lock); <-- waiting for CPU1
> rlock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8); <-- waiting for CPU2
>
> I believe in the original report this write-locking thread was the one
> calling mprotect_fixup().
>
> Per https://docs.kernel.org/mm/process_addrs.html#lock-ordering,
> inode->i_rwsem should be locked before mm->mmap_lock, so
> procfs_procmap_ioctl() has to be fixed to follow this lock ordering.
> One possibility I can think of is to use build_id_parse_nofault()
> first and if it fails because the required page is not faulted, we do
> freader_init_from_file(), then drop the mmap/vma lock and execute
> freader_fetch() outside of these locks to fault in that page. Once
> that's done, we'll retry the whole operation and this time
> build_id_parse_nofault() should pass (unless we already evicted that
> page, which is extremely unlikely and in that case, we'll retry
> again).
>
> I tried a POC with build_id_parse_nofault() but without the whole
> dance with freader_init_from_file/freader_fetch and the deadlock is
> gone. Andrii, WDYT?
I don't like it :) Too much complexity, _nofault() variant only makes
sense for BPF in non-sleepable contexts. I think this can be fixed
simpler and cleaner. We don't need to hold VMA lock while fetching
build ID. Build ID works with vma's vm_file, so we can just get its
reference, drop vma lock, then fetch build id. Below diff passes our
BPF selftests. Might need to think about a bit leaner code changes,
but the idea should be clear. Diff below will be butchered by gmail,
but you can fetch it at [0]. Do you mind validating that deadlock is
gone? Thanks!
[0] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/andrii/bpf-next.git/commit/?h=procmap-query-vma-deadlock-fix&id=7faf95b63a8a7ac6e78b6d90101c94bfa6ecdfd1
Author: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Date: Tue Jan 27 10:46:04 2026 -0800
procfs: avoid fetching build ID while holding VMA lock
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
diff --git a/fs/proc/task_mmu.c b/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
index 81dfc26bfae8..564bf82e3731 100644
--- a/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
+++ b/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
@@ -656,6 +656,7 @@ static int do_procmap_query(struct mm_struct *mm,
void __user *uarg)
struct proc_maps_locking_ctx lock_ctx = { .mm = mm };
struct procmap_query karg;
struct vm_area_struct *vma;
+ struct file *vm_file = NULL;
const char *name = NULL;
char build_id_buf[BUILD_ID_SIZE_MAX], *name_buf = NULL;
__u64 usize;
@@ -720,6 +721,9 @@ static int do_procmap_query(struct mm_struct *mm,
void __user *uarg)
karg.dev_major = MAJOR(inode->i_sb->s_dev);
karg.dev_minor = MINOR(inode->i_sb->s_dev);
karg.inode = inode->i_ino;
+
+ if (karg.build_id_size)
+ vm_file = get_file(vma->vm_file);
} else {
karg.vma_offset = 0;
karg.dev_major = 0;
@@ -727,21 +731,6 @@ static int do_procmap_query(struct mm_struct *mm,
void __user *uarg)
karg.inode = 0;
}
- if (karg.build_id_size) {
- __u32 build_id_sz;
-
- err = build_id_parse(vma, build_id_buf, &build_id_sz);
- if (err) {
- karg.build_id_size = 0;
- } else {
- if (karg.build_id_size < build_id_sz) {
- err = -ENAMETOOLONG;
- goto out;
- }
- karg.build_id_size = build_id_sz;
- }
- }
-
if (karg.vma_name_size) {
size_t name_buf_sz = min_t(size_t, PATH_MAX,
karg.vma_name_size);
const struct path *path;
@@ -779,6 +768,28 @@ static int do_procmap_query(struct mm_struct *mm,
void __user *uarg)
query_vma_teardown(&lock_ctx);
mmput(mm);
+ if (karg.build_id_size) {
+ __u32 build_id_sz;
+
+ err = -ENOENT;
+ if (vm_file)
+ err = build_id_parse_file(vm_file,
build_id_buf, &build_id_sz);
+ if (err) {
+ karg.build_id_size = 0;
+ } else {
+ if (karg.build_id_size < build_id_sz) {
+ err = -ENAMETOOLONG;
+ goto out;
+ }
+ karg.build_id_size = build_id_sz;
+ }
+ }
+
+ if (vm_file) {
+ fput(vm_file);
+ vm_file = NULL;
+ }
+
if (karg.vma_name_size &&
copy_to_user(u64_to_user_ptr(karg.vma_name_addr),
name, karg.vma_name_size)) {
kfree(name_buf);
@@ -797,6 +808,8 @@ static int do_procmap_query(struct mm_struct *mm,
void __user *uarg)
out:
query_vma_teardown(&lock_ctx);
+ if (vm_file)
+ fput(vm_file);
mmput(mm);
kfree(name_buf);
return err;
diff --git a/include/linux/buildid.h b/include/linux/buildid.h
index 831c1b4b626c..7acc06b22fb7 100644
--- a/include/linux/buildid.h
+++ b/include/linux/buildid.h
@@ -7,7 +7,10 @@
#define BUILD_ID_SIZE_MAX 20
struct vm_area_struct;
+struct file;
+
int build_id_parse(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned char
*build_id, __u32 *size);
+int build_id_parse_file(struct file *file, unsigned char *build_id,
__u32 *size);
int build_id_parse_nofault(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned char
*build_id, __u32 *size);
int build_id_parse_buf(const void *buf, unsigned char *build_id, u32 buf_size);
diff --git a/lib/buildid.c b/lib/buildid.c
index aaf61dfc0919..c0002129d526 100644
--- a/lib/buildid.c
+++ b/lib/buildid.c
@@ -271,7 +271,7 @@ static int get_build_id_64(struct freader *r,
unsigned char *build_id, __u32 *si
/* enough for Elf64_Ehdr, Elf64_Phdr, and all the smaller requests */
#define MAX_FREADER_BUF_SZ 64
-static int __build_id_parse(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned char
*build_id,
+static int __build_id_parse(struct file *file, unsigned char *build_id,
__u32 *size, bool may_fault)
{
const Elf32_Ehdr *ehdr;
@@ -279,11 +279,7 @@ static int __build_id_parse(struct vm_area_struct
*vma, unsigned char *build_id,
char buf[MAX_FREADER_BUF_SZ];
int ret;
- /* only works for page backed storage */
- if (!vma->vm_file)
- return -EINVAL;
-
- freader_init_from_file(&r, buf, sizeof(buf), vma->vm_file, may_fault);
+ freader_init_from_file(&r, buf, sizeof(buf), file, may_fault);
/* fetch first 18 bytes of ELF header for checks */
ehdr = freader_fetch(&r, 0, offsetofend(Elf32_Ehdr, e_type));
@@ -324,7 +320,11 @@ static int __build_id_parse(struct vm_area_struct
*vma, unsigned char *build_id,
*/
int build_id_parse_nofault(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned char
*build_id, __u32 *size)
{
- return __build_id_parse(vma, build_id, size, false /* !may_fault */);
+ /* only works for page backed storage */
+ if (!vma->vm_file)
+ return -EINVAL;
+
+ return __build_id_parse(vma->vm_file, build_id, size, false /*
!may_fault */);
}
/*
@@ -340,7 +340,16 @@ int build_id_parse_nofault(struct vm_area_struct
*vma, unsigned char *build_id,
*/
int build_id_parse(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned char
*build_id, __u32 *size)
{
- return __build_id_parse(vma, build_id, size, true /* may_fault */);
+ /* only works for page backed storage */
+ if (!vma->vm_file)
+ return -EINVAL;
+
+ return __build_id_parse(vma->vm_file, build_id, size, true /*
may_fault */);
+}
+
+int build_id_parse_file(struct file *file, unsigned char *build_id,
__u32 *size)
+{
+ return __build_id_parse(file, build_id, size, true /* may_fault */);
}
/**
>
> >
> > [ 62.320932][ T9229]
> > [ 62.321471][ T9229] ======================================================
> > [ 62.323016][ T9229] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
> > [ 62.324618][ T9229] 6.19.0-rc6-00001-g40bea6261b2a #42 Not tainted
> > [ 62.326013][ T9229] ------------------------------------------------------
> > [ 62.327560][ T9229] hillf/9229 is trying to acquire lock:
> > [ 62.328821][ T9229] ffff888145b7b5a8
> > (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8){++++}-{4:4}, at:
> > blkdev_read_iter+0x2a7/0x4e0
> > [ 62.331102][ T9229]
> > [ 62.331102][ T9229] but task is already holding lock:
> > [ 62.332722][ T9229] ffff888183a6e540 (&mm->mmap_lock){++++}-{4:4},
> > at: do_procmap_query+0x39f/0x1050
> > [ 62.334795][ T9229]
> > [ 62.334795][ T9229] which lock already depends on the new lock.
> > [ 62.334795][ T9229]
> > [ 62.337072][ T9229]
> > [ 62.337072][ T9229] the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
> > [ 62.338998][ T9229]
> > [ 62.338998][ T9229] -> #1 (&mm->mmap_lock){++++}-{4:4}:
> > [ 62.340646][ T9229] __might_fault+0xed/0x170
> > [ 62.341763][ T9229] _copy_to_iter+0x118/0x1720
> > [ 62.342913][ T9229] copy_page_to_iter+0x12d/0x1e0
> > [ 62.344167][ T9229] filemap_read+0x720/0x10a0
> > [ 62.345298][ T9229] blkdev_read_iter+0x2b5/0x4e0
> > [ 62.346480][ T9229] vfs_read+0x7f4/0xae0
> > [ 62.347518][ T9229] ksys_read+0x12a/0x250
> > [ 62.348584][ T9229] do_syscall_64+0xcb/0xf80
> > [ 62.349707][ T9229] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
> > [ 62.351116][ T9229]
> > [ 62.351116][ T9229] -> #0 (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8){++++}-{4:4}:
> > [ 62.353012][ T9229] __lock_acquire+0x1509/0x26d0
> > [ 62.354213][ T9229] lock_acquire+0x185/0x340
> > [ 62.355323][ T9229] down_read+0x98/0x490
> > [ 62.356441][ T9229] blkdev_read_iter+0x2a7/0x4e0
> > [ 62.357619][ T9229] __kernel_read+0x39a/0xa90
> > [ 62.358767][ T9229] freader_fetch+0x1d5/0xa80
> > [ 62.359927][ T9229] __build_id_parse.isra.0+0xea/0x6a0
> > [ 62.361232][ T9229] do_procmap_query+0xd75/0x1050
> > [ 62.362434][ T9229] procfs_procmap_ioctl+0x7a/0xb0
> > [ 62.363687][ T9229] __x64_sys_ioctl+0x18e/0x210
> > [ 62.364863][ T9229] do_syscall_64+0xcb/0xf80
> > [ 62.365977][ T9229] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
> > [ 62.367394][ T9229]
> > [ 62.367394][ T9229] other info that might help us debug this:
> > [ 62.367394][ T9229]
> > [ 62.369637][ T9229] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
> > [ 62.369637][ T9229]
> > [ 62.371237][ T9229] CPU0 CPU1
> > [ 62.372441][ T9229] ---- ----
> > [ 62.373687][ T9229] rlock(&mm->mmap_lock);
> > [ 62.374688][ T9229]
> > lock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8);
> > [ 62.376444][ T9229] lock(&mm->mmap_lock);
> > [ 62.377956][ T9229] rlock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8);
> > [ 62.379165][ T9229]
> > [ 62.379165][ T9229] *** DEADLOCK ***
> > [ 62.379165][ T9229]
> > [ 62.380952][ T9229] 1 lock held by hillf/9229:
> > [ 62.381971][ T9229] #0: ffff888183a6e540
> > (&mm->mmap_lock){++++}-{4:4}, at: do_procmap_query+0x39f/0x1050
> > [ 62.384162][ T9229]
> > [ 62.384162][ T9229] stack backtrace:
> > [ 62.385458][ T9229] CPU: 3 UID: 0 PID: 9229 Comm: hillf Not tainted
> > 6.19.0-rc6-00001-g40bea6261b2a #42 PREEMPT(full)
> > [ 62.385471][ T9229] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX,
> > 1996), BIOS 1.17.0-debian-1.17.0-1 04/01/2014
> > [ 62.385477][ T9229] Call Trace:
> > [ 62.385482][ T9229] <TASK>
> > [ 62.385487][ T9229] dump_stack_lvl+0x100/0x190
> > [ 62.385505][ T9229] print_circular_bug.cold+0x185/0x1d5
> > [ 62.385521][ T9229] check_noncircular+0x14a/0x170
> > [ 62.385534][ T9229] __lock_acquire+0x1509/0x26d0
> > [ 62.385547][ T9229] lock_acquire+0x185/0x340
> > [ 62.385557][ T9229] ? blkdev_read_iter+0x2a7/0x4e0
> > [ 62.385569][ T9229] ? __pfx___might_resched+0x10/0x10
> > [ 62.385583][ T9229] down_read+0x98/0x490
> > [ 62.385593][ T9229] ? blkdev_read_iter+0x2a7/0x4e0
> > [ 62.385603][ T9229] ? __pfx_down_read+0x10/0x10
> > [ 62.385612][ T9229] ? lock_acquire+0x185/0x340
> > [ 62.385622][ T9229] ? is_bpf_text_address+0x25/0x1a0
> > [ 62.385634][ T9229] blkdev_read_iter+0x2a7/0x4e0
> > [ 62.385645][ T9229] __kernel_read+0x39a/0xa90
> > [ 62.385658][ T9229] ? __pfx___kernel_read+0x10/0x10
> > [ 62.385671][ T9229] ? __lock_acquire+0x481/0x26d0
> > [ 62.385683][ T9229] freader_fetch+0x1d5/0xa80
> > [ 62.385697][ T9229] ? find_held_lock+0x2b/0x80
> > [ 62.385712][ T9229] ? __pfx_freader_fetch+0x10/0x10
> > [ 62.385725][ T9229] ? __asan_memset+0x27/0x50
> > [ 62.385737][ T9229] __build_id_parse.isra.0+0xea/0x6a0
> > [ 62.385751][ T9229] ? __pfx___build_id_parse.isra.0+0x10/0x10
> > [ 62.385766][ T9229] ? __pfx_find_vma+0x10/0x10
> > [ 62.385774][ T9229] ? __might_fault+0x129/0x170
> > [ 62.385788][ T9229] do_procmap_query+0xd75/0x1050
> > [ 62.385798][ T9229] ? __pfx_do_procmap_query+0x10/0x10
> > [ 62.385807][ T9229] ? __sanitizer_cov_trace_switch+0x53/0x90
> > [ 62.385817][ T9229] ? do_vfs_ioctl+0x226/0x13b0
> > [ 62.385828][ T9229] ? __pfx_do_vfs_ioctl+0x10/0x10
> > [ 62.385839][ T9229] ? putname+0xfc/0x1b0
> > [ 62.385846][ T9229] ? putname+0x101/0x1b0
> > [ 62.385857][ T9229] ? __x64_sys_openat+0x143/0x210
> > [ 62.385867][ T9229] procfs_procmap_ioctl+0x7a/0xb0
> > [ 62.385877][ T9229] ? __pfx_procfs_procmap_ioctl+0x10/0x10
> > [ 62.385888][ T9229] __x64_sys_ioctl+0x18e/0x210
> > [ 62.385899][ T9229] do_syscall_64+0xcb/0xf80
> > [ 62.385913][ T9229] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
> > [ 62.385923][ T9229] RIP: 0033:0x412209
> > [ 62.385931][ T9229] Code: c0 79 93 eb d5 48 8d 7c 1d 00 eb 99 0f 1f
> > 44 00 00 48 89 f8 48 89 f7 48 89 d6 48 89 ca 4d 89 c2 4d 89 c8 4c 8b
> > 4c 24 08 0f 05 <48> 3d 01 f0 ff ff 73 01 c3 48 c7 c1 d8 ff ff ff f7 d8
> > 64 89 01 48
> > [ 62.385940][ T9229] RSP: 002b:00007fff380d5588 EFLAGS: 00000217
> > ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000010
> > [ 62.385950][ T9229] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00007fff380d56c8
> > RCX: 0000000000412209
> > [ 62.385956][ T9229] RDX: 0000200000000180 RSI: 00000000c0686611
> > RDI: 0000000000000004
> > [ 62.385962][ T9229] RBP: 00007fff380d55a0 R08: 0000000000000000
> > R09: 00007fff380d5640
> > [ 62.385968][ T9229] R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000217
> > R12: 00007fff380d56b8
> > [ 62.385974][ T9229] R13: 0000000000000002 R14: 00000000004a0e40
> > R15: 0000000000000002
> > [ 62.385982][ T9229] </TASK>
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > > > other info that might help us debug this:
> > > > >
> > > > > Chain exists of:
> > > > > &sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8 --> &mm->mmap_lock --> vm_lock
> > > > >
> > > > > Possible unsafe locking scenario:
> > > > >
> > > > > CPU0 CPU1
> > > > > ---- ----
> > > > > rlock(vm_lock);
> > > > > lock(&mm->mmap_lock);
> > > > > lock(vm_lock);
> > > > > rlock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8);
> > > > >
> > > > > *** DEADLOCK ***
> > > > >
> > > > > 1 lock held by syz.0.17/6091:
> > > > > #0: ffff888012aa0448 (vm_lock){++++}-{0:0}, at: lock_next_vma+0x10e/0xed0 mm/mmap_lock.c:334
> > > > >
> > > > > stack backtrace:
> > > > > CPU: 2 UID: 0 PID: 6091 Comm: syz.0.17 Not tainted syzkaller #0 PREEMPT(full)
> > > > > Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 1.16.3-debian-1.16.3-2~bpo12+1 04/01/2014
> > > > > Call Trace:
> > > > > <TASK>
> > > > > __dump_stack lib/dump_stack.c:94 [inline]
> > > > > dump_stack_lvl+0x116/0x1f0 lib/dump_stack.c:120
> > > > > print_circular_bug+0x275/0x340 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:2043
> > > > > check_noncircular+0x146/0x160 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:2175
> > > > > check_prev_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3165 [inline]
> > > > > check_prevs_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3284 [inline]
> > > > > validate_chain kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3908 [inline]
> > > > > __lock_acquire+0x1669/0x2890 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5237
> > > > > lock_acquire kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5868 [inline]
> > > > > lock_acquire+0x179/0x330 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5825
> > > > > down_read+0x9b/0x460 kernel/locking/rwsem.c:1537
> > > > > inode_lock_shared include/linux/fs.h:1042 [inline]
> > > > > blkdev_read_iter+0x19e/0x500 block/fops.c:855
> > > > > __kernel_read+0x3f3/0xbf0 fs/read_write.c:530
> > > > > freader_fetch+0x1d7/0x9d0 lib/buildid.c:100
> > > > > __build_id_parse.isra.0+0xdd/0x6c0 lib/buildid.c:297
> > > > > do_procmap_query+0xb0e/0x1080 fs/proc/task_mmu.c:733
> > > > > procfs_procmap_ioctl+0x9d/0xe0 fs/proc/task_mmu.c:813
> > > > > vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline]
> > > > > __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:597 [inline]
> > > > > __se_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:583 [inline]
> > > > > __x64_sys_ioctl+0x18e/0x210 fs/ioctl.c:583
> > > > > do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline]
> > > > > do_syscall_64+0xcd/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94
> > > > > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
> > > > > RIP: 0033:0x7ff1a238f7c9
> > > > > Code: ff ff c3 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 0f 1f 40 00 48 89 f8 48 89 f7 48 89 d6 48 89 ca 4d 89 c2 4d 89 c8 4c 8b 4c 24 08 0f 05 <48> 3d 01 f0 ff ff 73 01 c3 48 c7 c1 a8 ff ff ff f7 d8 64 89 01 48
> > > > > RSP: 002b:00007ffebbe538b8 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000010
> > > > > RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00007ff1a25e5fa0 RCX: 00007ff1a238f7c9
> > > > > RDX: 0000200000000180 RSI: 00000000c0686611 RDI: 0000000000000004
> > > > > RBP: 00007ff1a2413f91 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000
> > > > > R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 0000000000000000
> > > > > R13: 00007ff1a25e5fa0 R14: 00007ff1a25e5fa0 R15: 0000000000000003
> > > > > </TASK>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [syzbot] [block?] possible deadlock in blkdev_read_iter
2026-01-27 18:51 ` Andrii Nakryiko
@ 2026-01-27 23:52 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2026-01-28 3:41 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Suren Baghdasaryan @ 2026-01-27 23:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrii Nakryiko
Cc: Hillf Danton, syzbot, axboe, linux-block, Lorenzo Stoakes,
linux-mm, linux-kernel, syzkaller-bugs
On Tue, Jan 27, 2026 at 10:51 AM Andrii Nakryiko
<andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 26, 2026 at 6:22 PM Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 26, 2026 at 2:33 PM Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jan 26, 2026 at 9:20 AM Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, Jan 24, 2026 at 3:32 AM Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Add Lorenzo and Suren
> > > >
> > > > Thanks!
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2026 15:14:36 -0800
> > > > > > Hello,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > syzbot found the following issue on:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > HEAD commit: 24d479d26b25 Linux 6.19-rc6
> > > > > > git tree: upstream
> > > > > > console output: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/log.txt?x=100033fa580000
> > > > > > kernel config: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/.config?x=1859476832863c41
> > > > > > dashboard link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=4e70c8e0a2017b432f7a
> > > > > > compiler: gcc (Debian 12.2.0-14+deb12u1) 12.2.0, GNU ld (GNU Binutils for Debian) 2.40
> > > > > > syz repro: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/repro.syz?x=11451b9a580000
> > > > > > C reproducer: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/repro.c?x=1045e852580000
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Downloadable assets:
> > > > > > disk image (non-bootable): https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/d900f083ada3/non_bootable_disk-24d479d2.raw.xz
> > > > > > vmlinux: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/d0f3c47f6869/vmlinux-24d479d2.xz
> > > > > > kernel image: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/800231513703/bzImage-24d479d2.xz
> > > > > >
> > > > > > IMPORTANT: if you fix the issue, please add the following tag to the commit:
> > > > > > Reported-by: syzbot+4e70c8e0a2017b432f7a@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
> > > > > >
> > > > > > WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
> > > > > > syzkaller #0 Not tainted
> > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > syz.0.17/6091 is trying to acquire lock:
> > > > > > ffff8881061287a8 (
> > > > > > &sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8){++++}-{4:4}, at: inode_lock_shared include/linux/fs.h:1042 [inline]
> > > > > > &sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8){++++}-{4:4}, at: blkdev_read_iter+0x19e/0x500 block/fops.c:855
> > > > > >
> > > > > > but task is already holding lock:
> > > > > > ffff888012aa0448 (vm_lock){++++}-{0:0}, at: lock_next_vma+0x10e/0xed0 mm/mmap_lock.c:334
> > > > > >
> > > > > > which lock already depends on the new lock.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -> #2 (vm_lock){++++}-{0:0}:
> > > > > > __vma_enter_locked+0x260/0x770 mm/mmap_lock.c:72
> > > > > > __vma_start_write+0x21/0x160 mm/mmap_lock.c:104
> > > > > > vma_start_write include/linux/mmap_lock.h:213 [inline]
> > > > > > mprotect_fixup+0x4e3/0xb80 mm/mprotect.c:768
> > > > > > setup_arg_pages+0x4a2/0xbb0 fs/exec.c:670
> > > > > > load_elf_binary+0xb5b/0x4fe0 fs/binfmt_elf.c:1028
> > > > > > search_binary_handler fs/exec.c:1669 [inline]
> > > > > > exec_binprm fs/exec.c:1701 [inline]
> > > > > > bprm_execve fs/exec.c:1753 [inline]
> > > > > > bprm_execve+0x8c2/0x1620 fs/exec.c:1729
> > > > > > kernel_execve+0x2ef/0x3b0 fs/exec.c:1919
> > > > > > try_to_run_init_process init/main.c:1506 [inline]
> > > > > > kernel_init+0x14a/0x2b0 init/main.c:1634
> > > > > > ret_from_fork+0x983/0xb10 arch/x86/kernel/process.c:158
> > > > > > ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30 arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:246
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -> #1 (&mm->mmap_lock){++++}-{4:4}:
> > > > > > __might_fault mm/memory.c:7174 [inline]
> > > > > > __might_fault+0x113/0x190 mm/memory.c:7168
> > > > > > _copy_to_iter+0x1c2/0x1710 lib/iov_iter.c:196
> > > > > > copy_page_to_iter lib/iov_iter.c:374 [inline]
> > > > > > copy_page_to_iter+0x12a/0x1e0 lib/iov_iter.c:361
> > > > > > copy_folio_to_iter include/linux/uio.h:204 [inline]
> > > > > > filemap_read+0x6b1/0xe40 mm/filemap.c:2851
> > > > > > blkdev_read_iter+0x1ac/0x500 block/fops.c:856
> > > > > > new_sync_read fs/read_write.c:491 [inline]
> > > > > > vfs_read+0x8bf/0xcf0 fs/read_write.c:572
> > > > > > ksys_read+0x12a/0x250 fs/read_write.c:715
> > > > > > do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline]
> > > > > > do_syscall_64+0xcd/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94
> > > > > > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -> #0 (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8){++++}-{4:4}:
> > > > > > check_prev_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3165 [inline]
> > > > > > check_prevs_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3284 [inline]
> > > > > > validate_chain kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3908 [inline]
> > > > > > __lock_acquire+0x1669/0x2890 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5237
> > > > > > lock_acquire kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5868 [inline]
> > > > > > lock_acquire+0x179/0x330 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5825
> > > > > > down_read+0x9b/0x460 kernel/locking/rwsem.c:1537
> > > > > > inode_lock_shared include/linux/fs.h:1042 [inline]
> > > > > > blkdev_read_iter+0x19e/0x500 block/fops.c:855
> > > > > > __kernel_read+0x3f3/0xbf0 fs/read_write.c:530
> > > > > > freader_fetch+0x1d7/0x9d0 lib/buildid.c:100
> > > > > > __build_id_parse.isra.0+0xdd/0x6c0 lib/buildid.c:297
> > > > > > do_procmap_query+0xb0e/0x1080 fs/proc/task_mmu.c:733
> > > > > > procfs_procmap_ioctl+0x9d/0xe0 fs/proc/task_mmu.c:813
> > > > > > vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline]
> > > > > > __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:597 [inline]
> > > > > > __se_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:583 [inline]
> > > > > > __x64_sys_ioctl+0x18e/0x210 fs/ioctl.c:583
> > > > > > do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline]
> > > > > > do_syscall_64+0xcd/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94
> > > > > > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > It looks like:
> > > > #0 is executing PROCMAP_QUERY ioclt, read-locks vm_lock and then calls
> > > > build_id_parse()->__build_id_parse(...,
> > > > may_fault=true)->__kernel_read() which eventually takes
> > > > inode->i_rwsem.
> > > > #1 is a file-backed page fault which asserts that it might take
> > > > mmap_lock for read.
> > > > #2 is load_elf_binary()->mprotect_fixup() which write-locks both
> > > > mmap_lock and vm_lock. I'm guessing it already holds inode->i_rwsem
> > > > before write-locking these locks.
> > > >
> > > > Originally I thought the issue is most liley introduced in
> > > > d9d1c2d81797 ("fs/proc/task_mmu: execute PROCMAP_QUERY ioctl under
> > > > per-vma locks"). But if #2 indeed takes inode->i_rwsem before
> > > > write-locking mmap_lock, then the problem should exist even before
> > > > that change when we didn't use vm_lock and relied on mmap_lock...
> > > >
> > > > I'll try to analyze this more before attempting a fix.
> > >
> > > I was able to reproduce the same issue even after reverting
> > > d9d1c2d81797. The deadlock in this case is simpler and involves
> > > mmap_lock instead of vm_lock (see below).
> > > Looks like the race is between the read() syscall and do_procmap_query().
> > > I'll continue investigating, in the meantime CC'ing Andrii.
> >
> > So, here is a cleaner version of that report (with d9d1c2d81797 reverted):
> >
> > -> #1 (&mm->mmap_lock){++++}-{4:4}:
> > __might_fault+0xed/0x170
> > _copy_to_iter+0x118/0x1720
> > copy_page_to_iter+0x12d/0x1e0
> > filemap_read+0x720/0x10a0
> > blkdev_read_iter+0x2b5/0x4e0
> > vfs_read+0x7f4/0xae0
> > ksys_read+0x12a/0x250
> > do_syscall_64+0xcb/0xf80
> > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
> >
> > -> #0 (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8){++++}-{4:4}:
> > __lock_acquire+0x1509/0x26d0
> > lock_acquire+0x185/0x340
> > down_read+0x98/0x490
> > blkdev_read_iter+0x2a7/0x4e0
> > __kernel_read+0x39a/0xa90
> > freader_fetch+0x1d5/0xa80
> > __build_id_parse.isra.0+0xea/0x6a0
> > do_procmap_query+0xd75/0x1050
> > procfs_procmap_ioctl+0x7a/0xb0
> > __x64_sys_ioctl+0x18e/0x210
> > do_syscall_64+0xcb/0xf80
> > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
> >
> > other info that might help us debug this:
> >
> > Possible unsafe locking scenario:
> >
> > CPU0 CPU1
> > ---- ----
> > rlock(&mm->mmap_lock);
> > lock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8);
> > lock(&mm->mmap_lock);
> > rlock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8);
> >
> > *** DEADLOCK ***
> >
> > Both threads are calling blkdev_read_iter(), which uses
> > inode_lock_shared() to read-lock inode->i_rwsem. I'm not sure why CPU1
> > shows lock() instead of rlock(). So both threads read-lock
> > inode->i_rwsem and mmap_lock but in a different order. IIUC, with
> > read-locks this should not deadlock until some other thread
> > write-locks the mmap_lock in between and this becomes a real deadlock:
> >
> > CPU0 CPU1 CPU2
> > ---- ---- ----
> > rlock(&mm->mmap_lock);
> > rlock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8);
> > wlock(&mm->mmap_lock) <-- waiting for CPU0
> > rlock(&mm->mmap_lock); <-- waiting for CPU1
> > rlock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8); <-- waiting for CPU2
> >
> > I believe in the original report this write-locking thread was the one
> > calling mprotect_fixup().
> >
> > Per https://docs.kernel.org/mm/process_addrs.html#lock-ordering,
> > inode->i_rwsem should be locked before mm->mmap_lock, so
> > procfs_procmap_ioctl() has to be fixed to follow this lock ordering.
> > One possibility I can think of is to use build_id_parse_nofault()
> > first and if it fails because the required page is not faulted, we do
> > freader_init_from_file(), then drop the mmap/vma lock and execute
> > freader_fetch() outside of these locks to fault in that page. Once
> > that's done, we'll retry the whole operation and this time
> > build_id_parse_nofault() should pass (unless we already evicted that
> > page, which is extremely unlikely and in that case, we'll retry
> > again).
> >
> > I tried a POC with build_id_parse_nofault() but without the whole
> > dance with freader_init_from_file/freader_fetch and the deadlock is
> > gone. Andrii, WDYT?
>
> I don't like it :) Too much complexity, _nofault() variant only makes
> sense for BPF in non-sleepable contexts. I think this can be fixed
> simpler and cleaner. We don't need to hold VMA lock while fetching
> build ID. Build ID works with vma's vm_file, so we can just get its
> reference, drop vma lock, then fetch build id. Below diff passes our
> BPF selftests. Might need to think about a bit leaner code changes,
> but the idea should be clear. Diff below will be butchered by gmail,
> but you can fetch it at [0]. Do you mind validating that deadlock is
> gone? Thanks!
Sure. I'll test it later today, once I'm home.
>
> [0] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/andrii/bpf-next.git/commit/?h=procmap-query-vma-deadlock-fix&id=7faf95b63a8a7ac6e78b6d90101c94bfa6ecdfd1
>
> Author: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
> Date: Tue Jan 27 10:46:04 2026 -0800
>
> procfs: avoid fetching build ID while holding VMA lock
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
>
> diff --git a/fs/proc/task_mmu.c b/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
> index 81dfc26bfae8..564bf82e3731 100644
> --- a/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
> +++ b/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
> @@ -656,6 +656,7 @@ static int do_procmap_query(struct mm_struct *mm,
> void __user *uarg)
> struct proc_maps_locking_ctx lock_ctx = { .mm = mm };
> struct procmap_query karg;
> struct vm_area_struct *vma;
> + struct file *vm_file = NULL;
> const char *name = NULL;
> char build_id_buf[BUILD_ID_SIZE_MAX], *name_buf = NULL;
> __u64 usize;
> @@ -720,6 +721,9 @@ static int do_procmap_query(struct mm_struct *mm,
> void __user *uarg)
> karg.dev_major = MAJOR(inode->i_sb->s_dev);
> karg.dev_minor = MINOR(inode->i_sb->s_dev);
> karg.inode = inode->i_ino;
> +
> + if (karg.build_id_size)
> + vm_file = get_file(vma->vm_file);
> } else {
> karg.vma_offset = 0;
> karg.dev_major = 0;
> @@ -727,21 +731,6 @@ static int do_procmap_query(struct mm_struct *mm,
> void __user *uarg)
> karg.inode = 0;
> }
>
> - if (karg.build_id_size) {
> - __u32 build_id_sz;
> -
> - err = build_id_parse(vma, build_id_buf, &build_id_sz);
> - if (err) {
> - karg.build_id_size = 0;
> - } else {
> - if (karg.build_id_size < build_id_sz) {
> - err = -ENAMETOOLONG;
> - goto out;
> - }
> - karg.build_id_size = build_id_sz;
> - }
> - }
> -
> if (karg.vma_name_size) {
> size_t name_buf_sz = min_t(size_t, PATH_MAX,
> karg.vma_name_size);
> const struct path *path;
> @@ -779,6 +768,28 @@ static int do_procmap_query(struct mm_struct *mm,
> void __user *uarg)
> query_vma_teardown(&lock_ctx);
> mmput(mm);
>
> + if (karg.build_id_size) {
> + __u32 build_id_sz;
> +
> + err = -ENOENT;
> + if (vm_file)
> + err = build_id_parse_file(vm_file,
> build_id_buf, &build_id_sz);
> + if (err) {
> + karg.build_id_size = 0;
> + } else {
> + if (karg.build_id_size < build_id_sz) {
> + err = -ENAMETOOLONG;
> + goto out;
> + }
> + karg.build_id_size = build_id_sz;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + if (vm_file) {
> + fput(vm_file);
> + vm_file = NULL;
> + }
> +
> if (karg.vma_name_size &&
> copy_to_user(u64_to_user_ptr(karg.vma_name_addr),
> name, karg.vma_name_size)) {
> kfree(name_buf);
> @@ -797,6 +808,8 @@ static int do_procmap_query(struct mm_struct *mm,
> void __user *uarg)
>
> out:
> query_vma_teardown(&lock_ctx);
> + if (vm_file)
> + fput(vm_file);
> mmput(mm);
> kfree(name_buf);
> return err;
> diff --git a/include/linux/buildid.h b/include/linux/buildid.h
> index 831c1b4b626c..7acc06b22fb7 100644
> --- a/include/linux/buildid.h
> +++ b/include/linux/buildid.h
> @@ -7,7 +7,10 @@
> #define BUILD_ID_SIZE_MAX 20
>
> struct vm_area_struct;
> +struct file;
> +
> int build_id_parse(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned char
> *build_id, __u32 *size);
> +int build_id_parse_file(struct file *file, unsigned char *build_id,
> __u32 *size);
> int build_id_parse_nofault(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned char
> *build_id, __u32 *size);
> int build_id_parse_buf(const void *buf, unsigned char *build_id, u32 buf_size);
>
> diff --git a/lib/buildid.c b/lib/buildid.c
> index aaf61dfc0919..c0002129d526 100644
> --- a/lib/buildid.c
> +++ b/lib/buildid.c
> @@ -271,7 +271,7 @@ static int get_build_id_64(struct freader *r,
> unsigned char *build_id, __u32 *si
> /* enough for Elf64_Ehdr, Elf64_Phdr, and all the smaller requests */
> #define MAX_FREADER_BUF_SZ 64
>
> -static int __build_id_parse(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned char
> *build_id,
> +static int __build_id_parse(struct file *file, unsigned char *build_id,
> __u32 *size, bool may_fault)
> {
> const Elf32_Ehdr *ehdr;
> @@ -279,11 +279,7 @@ static int __build_id_parse(struct vm_area_struct
> *vma, unsigned char *build_id,
> char buf[MAX_FREADER_BUF_SZ];
> int ret;
>
> - /* only works for page backed storage */
> - if (!vma->vm_file)
> - return -EINVAL;
> -
> - freader_init_from_file(&r, buf, sizeof(buf), vma->vm_file, may_fault);
> + freader_init_from_file(&r, buf, sizeof(buf), file, may_fault);
>
> /* fetch first 18 bytes of ELF header for checks */
> ehdr = freader_fetch(&r, 0, offsetofend(Elf32_Ehdr, e_type));
> @@ -324,7 +320,11 @@ static int __build_id_parse(struct vm_area_struct
> *vma, unsigned char *build_id,
> */
> int build_id_parse_nofault(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned char
> *build_id, __u32 *size)
> {
> - return __build_id_parse(vma, build_id, size, false /* !may_fault */);
> + /* only works for page backed storage */
> + if (!vma->vm_file)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + return __build_id_parse(vma->vm_file, build_id, size, false /*
> !may_fault */);
> }
>
> /*
> @@ -340,7 +340,16 @@ int build_id_parse_nofault(struct vm_area_struct
> *vma, unsigned char *build_id,
> */
> int build_id_parse(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned char
> *build_id, __u32 *size)
> {
> - return __build_id_parse(vma, build_id, size, true /* may_fault */);
> + /* only works for page backed storage */
> + if (!vma->vm_file)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + return __build_id_parse(vma->vm_file, build_id, size, true /*
> may_fault */);
> +}
> +
> +int build_id_parse_file(struct file *file, unsigned char *build_id,
> __u32 *size)
> +{
> + return __build_id_parse(file, build_id, size, true /* may_fault */);
> }
>
> /**
>
>
> >
> > >
> > > [ 62.320932][ T9229]
> > > [ 62.321471][ T9229] ======================================================
> > > [ 62.323016][ T9229] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
> > > [ 62.324618][ T9229] 6.19.0-rc6-00001-g40bea6261b2a #42 Not tainted
> > > [ 62.326013][ T9229] ------------------------------------------------------
> > > [ 62.327560][ T9229] hillf/9229 is trying to acquire lock:
> > > [ 62.328821][ T9229] ffff888145b7b5a8
> > > (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8){++++}-{4:4}, at:
> > > blkdev_read_iter+0x2a7/0x4e0
> > > [ 62.331102][ T9229]
> > > [ 62.331102][ T9229] but task is already holding lock:
> > > [ 62.332722][ T9229] ffff888183a6e540 (&mm->mmap_lock){++++}-{4:4},
> > > at: do_procmap_query+0x39f/0x1050
> > > [ 62.334795][ T9229]
> > > [ 62.334795][ T9229] which lock already depends on the new lock.
> > > [ 62.334795][ T9229]
> > > [ 62.337072][ T9229]
> > > [ 62.337072][ T9229] the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
> > > [ 62.338998][ T9229]
> > > [ 62.338998][ T9229] -> #1 (&mm->mmap_lock){++++}-{4:4}:
> > > [ 62.340646][ T9229] __might_fault+0xed/0x170
> > > [ 62.341763][ T9229] _copy_to_iter+0x118/0x1720
> > > [ 62.342913][ T9229] copy_page_to_iter+0x12d/0x1e0
> > > [ 62.344167][ T9229] filemap_read+0x720/0x10a0
> > > [ 62.345298][ T9229] blkdev_read_iter+0x2b5/0x4e0
> > > [ 62.346480][ T9229] vfs_read+0x7f4/0xae0
> > > [ 62.347518][ T9229] ksys_read+0x12a/0x250
> > > [ 62.348584][ T9229] do_syscall_64+0xcb/0xf80
> > > [ 62.349707][ T9229] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
> > > [ 62.351116][ T9229]
> > > [ 62.351116][ T9229] -> #0 (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8){++++}-{4:4}:
> > > [ 62.353012][ T9229] __lock_acquire+0x1509/0x26d0
> > > [ 62.354213][ T9229] lock_acquire+0x185/0x340
> > > [ 62.355323][ T9229] down_read+0x98/0x490
> > > [ 62.356441][ T9229] blkdev_read_iter+0x2a7/0x4e0
> > > [ 62.357619][ T9229] __kernel_read+0x39a/0xa90
> > > [ 62.358767][ T9229] freader_fetch+0x1d5/0xa80
> > > [ 62.359927][ T9229] __build_id_parse.isra.0+0xea/0x6a0
> > > [ 62.361232][ T9229] do_procmap_query+0xd75/0x1050
> > > [ 62.362434][ T9229] procfs_procmap_ioctl+0x7a/0xb0
> > > [ 62.363687][ T9229] __x64_sys_ioctl+0x18e/0x210
> > > [ 62.364863][ T9229] do_syscall_64+0xcb/0xf80
> > > [ 62.365977][ T9229] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
> > > [ 62.367394][ T9229]
> > > [ 62.367394][ T9229] other info that might help us debug this:
> > > [ 62.367394][ T9229]
> > > [ 62.369637][ T9229] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
> > > [ 62.369637][ T9229]
> > > [ 62.371237][ T9229] CPU0 CPU1
> > > [ 62.372441][ T9229] ---- ----
> > > [ 62.373687][ T9229] rlock(&mm->mmap_lock);
> > > [ 62.374688][ T9229]
> > > lock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8);
> > > [ 62.376444][ T9229] lock(&mm->mmap_lock);
> > > [ 62.377956][ T9229] rlock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8);
> > > [ 62.379165][ T9229]
> > > [ 62.379165][ T9229] *** DEADLOCK ***
> > > [ 62.379165][ T9229]
> > > [ 62.380952][ T9229] 1 lock held by hillf/9229:
> > > [ 62.381971][ T9229] #0: ffff888183a6e540
> > > (&mm->mmap_lock){++++}-{4:4}, at: do_procmap_query+0x39f/0x1050
> > > [ 62.384162][ T9229]
> > > [ 62.384162][ T9229] stack backtrace:
> > > [ 62.385458][ T9229] CPU: 3 UID: 0 PID: 9229 Comm: hillf Not tainted
> > > 6.19.0-rc6-00001-g40bea6261b2a #42 PREEMPT(full)
> > > [ 62.385471][ T9229] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX,
> > > 1996), BIOS 1.17.0-debian-1.17.0-1 04/01/2014
> > > [ 62.385477][ T9229] Call Trace:
> > > [ 62.385482][ T9229] <TASK>
> > > [ 62.385487][ T9229] dump_stack_lvl+0x100/0x190
> > > [ 62.385505][ T9229] print_circular_bug.cold+0x185/0x1d5
> > > [ 62.385521][ T9229] check_noncircular+0x14a/0x170
> > > [ 62.385534][ T9229] __lock_acquire+0x1509/0x26d0
> > > [ 62.385547][ T9229] lock_acquire+0x185/0x340
> > > [ 62.385557][ T9229] ? blkdev_read_iter+0x2a7/0x4e0
> > > [ 62.385569][ T9229] ? __pfx___might_resched+0x10/0x10
> > > [ 62.385583][ T9229] down_read+0x98/0x490
> > > [ 62.385593][ T9229] ? blkdev_read_iter+0x2a7/0x4e0
> > > [ 62.385603][ T9229] ? __pfx_down_read+0x10/0x10
> > > [ 62.385612][ T9229] ? lock_acquire+0x185/0x340
> > > [ 62.385622][ T9229] ? is_bpf_text_address+0x25/0x1a0
> > > [ 62.385634][ T9229] blkdev_read_iter+0x2a7/0x4e0
> > > [ 62.385645][ T9229] __kernel_read+0x39a/0xa90
> > > [ 62.385658][ T9229] ? __pfx___kernel_read+0x10/0x10
> > > [ 62.385671][ T9229] ? __lock_acquire+0x481/0x26d0
> > > [ 62.385683][ T9229] freader_fetch+0x1d5/0xa80
> > > [ 62.385697][ T9229] ? find_held_lock+0x2b/0x80
> > > [ 62.385712][ T9229] ? __pfx_freader_fetch+0x10/0x10
> > > [ 62.385725][ T9229] ? __asan_memset+0x27/0x50
> > > [ 62.385737][ T9229] __build_id_parse.isra.0+0xea/0x6a0
> > > [ 62.385751][ T9229] ? __pfx___build_id_parse.isra.0+0x10/0x10
> > > [ 62.385766][ T9229] ? __pfx_find_vma+0x10/0x10
> > > [ 62.385774][ T9229] ? __might_fault+0x129/0x170
> > > [ 62.385788][ T9229] do_procmap_query+0xd75/0x1050
> > > [ 62.385798][ T9229] ? __pfx_do_procmap_query+0x10/0x10
> > > [ 62.385807][ T9229] ? __sanitizer_cov_trace_switch+0x53/0x90
> > > [ 62.385817][ T9229] ? do_vfs_ioctl+0x226/0x13b0
> > > [ 62.385828][ T9229] ? __pfx_do_vfs_ioctl+0x10/0x10
> > > [ 62.385839][ T9229] ? putname+0xfc/0x1b0
> > > [ 62.385846][ T9229] ? putname+0x101/0x1b0
> > > [ 62.385857][ T9229] ? __x64_sys_openat+0x143/0x210
> > > [ 62.385867][ T9229] procfs_procmap_ioctl+0x7a/0xb0
> > > [ 62.385877][ T9229] ? __pfx_procfs_procmap_ioctl+0x10/0x10
> > > [ 62.385888][ T9229] __x64_sys_ioctl+0x18e/0x210
> > > [ 62.385899][ T9229] do_syscall_64+0xcb/0xf80
> > > [ 62.385913][ T9229] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
> > > [ 62.385923][ T9229] RIP: 0033:0x412209
> > > [ 62.385931][ T9229] Code: c0 79 93 eb d5 48 8d 7c 1d 00 eb 99 0f 1f
> > > 44 00 00 48 89 f8 48 89 f7 48 89 d6 48 89 ca 4d 89 c2 4d 89 c8 4c 8b
> > > 4c 24 08 0f 05 <48> 3d 01 f0 ff ff 73 01 c3 48 c7 c1 d8 ff ff ff f7 d8
> > > 64 89 01 48
> > > [ 62.385940][ T9229] RSP: 002b:00007fff380d5588 EFLAGS: 00000217
> > > ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000010
> > > [ 62.385950][ T9229] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00007fff380d56c8
> > > RCX: 0000000000412209
> > > [ 62.385956][ T9229] RDX: 0000200000000180 RSI: 00000000c0686611
> > > RDI: 0000000000000004
> > > [ 62.385962][ T9229] RBP: 00007fff380d55a0 R08: 0000000000000000
> > > R09: 00007fff380d5640
> > > [ 62.385968][ T9229] R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000217
> > > R12: 00007fff380d56b8
> > > [ 62.385974][ T9229] R13: 0000000000000002 R14: 00000000004a0e40
> > > R15: 0000000000000002
> > > [ 62.385982][ T9229] </TASK>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > > > other info that might help us debug this:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Chain exists of:
> > > > > > &sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8 --> &mm->mmap_lock --> vm_lock
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Possible unsafe locking scenario:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > CPU0 CPU1
> > > > > > ---- ----
> > > > > > rlock(vm_lock);
> > > > > > lock(&mm->mmap_lock);
> > > > > > lock(vm_lock);
> > > > > > rlock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8);
> > > > > >
> > > > > > *** DEADLOCK ***
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1 lock held by syz.0.17/6091:
> > > > > > #0: ffff888012aa0448 (vm_lock){++++}-{0:0}, at: lock_next_vma+0x10e/0xed0 mm/mmap_lock.c:334
> > > > > >
> > > > > > stack backtrace:
> > > > > > CPU: 2 UID: 0 PID: 6091 Comm: syz.0.17 Not tainted syzkaller #0 PREEMPT(full)
> > > > > > Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 1.16.3-debian-1.16.3-2~bpo12+1 04/01/2014
> > > > > > Call Trace:
> > > > > > <TASK>
> > > > > > __dump_stack lib/dump_stack.c:94 [inline]
> > > > > > dump_stack_lvl+0x116/0x1f0 lib/dump_stack.c:120
> > > > > > print_circular_bug+0x275/0x340 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:2043
> > > > > > check_noncircular+0x146/0x160 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:2175
> > > > > > check_prev_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3165 [inline]
> > > > > > check_prevs_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3284 [inline]
> > > > > > validate_chain kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3908 [inline]
> > > > > > __lock_acquire+0x1669/0x2890 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5237
> > > > > > lock_acquire kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5868 [inline]
> > > > > > lock_acquire+0x179/0x330 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5825
> > > > > > down_read+0x9b/0x460 kernel/locking/rwsem.c:1537
> > > > > > inode_lock_shared include/linux/fs.h:1042 [inline]
> > > > > > blkdev_read_iter+0x19e/0x500 block/fops.c:855
> > > > > > __kernel_read+0x3f3/0xbf0 fs/read_write.c:530
> > > > > > freader_fetch+0x1d7/0x9d0 lib/buildid.c:100
> > > > > > __build_id_parse.isra.0+0xdd/0x6c0 lib/buildid.c:297
> > > > > > do_procmap_query+0xb0e/0x1080 fs/proc/task_mmu.c:733
> > > > > > procfs_procmap_ioctl+0x9d/0xe0 fs/proc/task_mmu.c:813
> > > > > > vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline]
> > > > > > __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:597 [inline]
> > > > > > __se_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:583 [inline]
> > > > > > __x64_sys_ioctl+0x18e/0x210 fs/ioctl.c:583
> > > > > > do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline]
> > > > > > do_syscall_64+0xcd/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94
> > > > > > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
> > > > > > RIP: 0033:0x7ff1a238f7c9
> > > > > > Code: ff ff c3 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 0f 1f 40 00 48 89 f8 48 89 f7 48 89 d6 48 89 ca 4d 89 c2 4d 89 c8 4c 8b 4c 24 08 0f 05 <48> 3d 01 f0 ff ff 73 01 c3 48 c7 c1 a8 ff ff ff f7 d8 64 89 01 48
> > > > > > RSP: 002b:00007ffebbe538b8 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000010
> > > > > > RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00007ff1a25e5fa0 RCX: 00007ff1a238f7c9
> > > > > > RDX: 0000200000000180 RSI: 00000000c0686611 RDI: 0000000000000004
> > > > > > RBP: 00007ff1a2413f91 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000
> > > > > > R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 0000000000000000
> > > > > > R13: 00007ff1a25e5fa0 R14: 00007ff1a25e5fa0 R15: 0000000000000003
> > > > > > </TASK>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [syzbot] [block?] possible deadlock in blkdev_read_iter
2026-01-27 23:52 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
@ 2026-01-28 3:41 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Suren Baghdasaryan @ 2026-01-28 3:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrii Nakryiko
Cc: Hillf Danton, syzbot, axboe, linux-block, Lorenzo Stoakes,
linux-mm, linux-kernel, syzkaller-bugs
On Tue, Jan 27, 2026 at 3:52 PM Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 27, 2026 at 10:51 AM Andrii Nakryiko
> <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 26, 2026 at 6:22 PM Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jan 26, 2026 at 2:33 PM Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Jan 26, 2026 at 9:20 AM Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sat, Jan 24, 2026 at 3:32 AM Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Add Lorenzo and Suren
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks!
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2026 15:14:36 -0800
> > > > > > > Hello,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > syzbot found the following issue on:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > HEAD commit: 24d479d26b25 Linux 6.19-rc6
> > > > > > > git tree: upstream
> > > > > > > console output: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/log.txt?x=100033fa580000
> > > > > > > kernel config: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/.config?x=1859476832863c41
> > > > > > > dashboard link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=4e70c8e0a2017b432f7a
> > > > > > > compiler: gcc (Debian 12.2.0-14+deb12u1) 12.2.0, GNU ld (GNU Binutils for Debian) 2.40
> > > > > > > syz repro: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/repro.syz?x=11451b9a580000
> > > > > > > C reproducer: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/repro.c?x=1045e852580000
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Downloadable assets:
> > > > > > > disk image (non-bootable): https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/d900f083ada3/non_bootable_disk-24d479d2.raw.xz
> > > > > > > vmlinux: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/d0f3c47f6869/vmlinux-24d479d2.xz
> > > > > > > kernel image: https://storage.googleapis.com/syzbot-assets/800231513703/bzImage-24d479d2.xz
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > IMPORTANT: if you fix the issue, please add the following tag to the commit:
> > > > > > > Reported-by: syzbot+4e70c8e0a2017b432f7a@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
> > > > > > > syzkaller #0 Not tainted
> > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > syz.0.17/6091 is trying to acquire lock:
> > > > > > > ffff8881061287a8 (
> > > > > > > &sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8){++++}-{4:4}, at: inode_lock_shared include/linux/fs.h:1042 [inline]
> > > > > > > &sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8){++++}-{4:4}, at: blkdev_read_iter+0x19e/0x500 block/fops.c:855
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > but task is already holding lock:
> > > > > > > ffff888012aa0448 (vm_lock){++++}-{0:0}, at: lock_next_vma+0x10e/0xed0 mm/mmap_lock.c:334
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > which lock already depends on the new lock.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -> #2 (vm_lock){++++}-{0:0}:
> > > > > > > __vma_enter_locked+0x260/0x770 mm/mmap_lock.c:72
> > > > > > > __vma_start_write+0x21/0x160 mm/mmap_lock.c:104
> > > > > > > vma_start_write include/linux/mmap_lock.h:213 [inline]
> > > > > > > mprotect_fixup+0x4e3/0xb80 mm/mprotect.c:768
> > > > > > > setup_arg_pages+0x4a2/0xbb0 fs/exec.c:670
> > > > > > > load_elf_binary+0xb5b/0x4fe0 fs/binfmt_elf.c:1028
> > > > > > > search_binary_handler fs/exec.c:1669 [inline]
> > > > > > > exec_binprm fs/exec.c:1701 [inline]
> > > > > > > bprm_execve fs/exec.c:1753 [inline]
> > > > > > > bprm_execve+0x8c2/0x1620 fs/exec.c:1729
> > > > > > > kernel_execve+0x2ef/0x3b0 fs/exec.c:1919
> > > > > > > try_to_run_init_process init/main.c:1506 [inline]
> > > > > > > kernel_init+0x14a/0x2b0 init/main.c:1634
> > > > > > > ret_from_fork+0x983/0xb10 arch/x86/kernel/process.c:158
> > > > > > > ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30 arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:246
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -> #1 (&mm->mmap_lock){++++}-{4:4}:
> > > > > > > __might_fault mm/memory.c:7174 [inline]
> > > > > > > __might_fault+0x113/0x190 mm/memory.c:7168
> > > > > > > _copy_to_iter+0x1c2/0x1710 lib/iov_iter.c:196
> > > > > > > copy_page_to_iter lib/iov_iter.c:374 [inline]
> > > > > > > copy_page_to_iter+0x12a/0x1e0 lib/iov_iter.c:361
> > > > > > > copy_folio_to_iter include/linux/uio.h:204 [inline]
> > > > > > > filemap_read+0x6b1/0xe40 mm/filemap.c:2851
> > > > > > > blkdev_read_iter+0x1ac/0x500 block/fops.c:856
> > > > > > > new_sync_read fs/read_write.c:491 [inline]
> > > > > > > vfs_read+0x8bf/0xcf0 fs/read_write.c:572
> > > > > > > ksys_read+0x12a/0x250 fs/read_write.c:715
> > > > > > > do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline]
> > > > > > > do_syscall_64+0xcd/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94
> > > > > > > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -> #0 (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8){++++}-{4:4}:
> > > > > > > check_prev_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3165 [inline]
> > > > > > > check_prevs_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3284 [inline]
> > > > > > > validate_chain kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3908 [inline]
> > > > > > > __lock_acquire+0x1669/0x2890 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5237
> > > > > > > lock_acquire kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5868 [inline]
> > > > > > > lock_acquire+0x179/0x330 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5825
> > > > > > > down_read+0x9b/0x460 kernel/locking/rwsem.c:1537
> > > > > > > inode_lock_shared include/linux/fs.h:1042 [inline]
> > > > > > > blkdev_read_iter+0x19e/0x500 block/fops.c:855
> > > > > > > __kernel_read+0x3f3/0xbf0 fs/read_write.c:530
> > > > > > > freader_fetch+0x1d7/0x9d0 lib/buildid.c:100
> > > > > > > __build_id_parse.isra.0+0xdd/0x6c0 lib/buildid.c:297
> > > > > > > do_procmap_query+0xb0e/0x1080 fs/proc/task_mmu.c:733
> > > > > > > procfs_procmap_ioctl+0x9d/0xe0 fs/proc/task_mmu.c:813
> > > > > > > vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline]
> > > > > > > __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:597 [inline]
> > > > > > > __se_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:583 [inline]
> > > > > > > __x64_sys_ioctl+0x18e/0x210 fs/ioctl.c:583
> > > > > > > do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline]
> > > > > > > do_syscall_64+0xcd/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94
> > > > > > > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > It looks like:
> > > > > #0 is executing PROCMAP_QUERY ioclt, read-locks vm_lock and then calls
> > > > > build_id_parse()->__build_id_parse(...,
> > > > > may_fault=true)->__kernel_read() which eventually takes
> > > > > inode->i_rwsem.
> > > > > #1 is a file-backed page fault which asserts that it might take
> > > > > mmap_lock for read.
> > > > > #2 is load_elf_binary()->mprotect_fixup() which write-locks both
> > > > > mmap_lock and vm_lock. I'm guessing it already holds inode->i_rwsem
> > > > > before write-locking these locks.
> > > > >
> > > > > Originally I thought the issue is most liley introduced in
> > > > > d9d1c2d81797 ("fs/proc/task_mmu: execute PROCMAP_QUERY ioctl under
> > > > > per-vma locks"). But if #2 indeed takes inode->i_rwsem before
> > > > > write-locking mmap_lock, then the problem should exist even before
> > > > > that change when we didn't use vm_lock and relied on mmap_lock...
> > > > >
> > > > > I'll try to analyze this more before attempting a fix.
> > > >
> > > > I was able to reproduce the same issue even after reverting
> > > > d9d1c2d81797. The deadlock in this case is simpler and involves
> > > > mmap_lock instead of vm_lock (see below).
> > > > Looks like the race is between the read() syscall and do_procmap_query().
> > > > I'll continue investigating, in the meantime CC'ing Andrii.
> > >
> > > So, here is a cleaner version of that report (with d9d1c2d81797 reverted):
> > >
> > > -> #1 (&mm->mmap_lock){++++}-{4:4}:
> > > __might_fault+0xed/0x170
> > > _copy_to_iter+0x118/0x1720
> > > copy_page_to_iter+0x12d/0x1e0
> > > filemap_read+0x720/0x10a0
> > > blkdev_read_iter+0x2b5/0x4e0
> > > vfs_read+0x7f4/0xae0
> > > ksys_read+0x12a/0x250
> > > do_syscall_64+0xcb/0xf80
> > > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
> > >
> > > -> #0 (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8){++++}-{4:4}:
> > > __lock_acquire+0x1509/0x26d0
> > > lock_acquire+0x185/0x340
> > > down_read+0x98/0x490
> > > blkdev_read_iter+0x2a7/0x4e0
> > > __kernel_read+0x39a/0xa90
> > > freader_fetch+0x1d5/0xa80
> > > __build_id_parse.isra.0+0xea/0x6a0
> > > do_procmap_query+0xd75/0x1050
> > > procfs_procmap_ioctl+0x7a/0xb0
> > > __x64_sys_ioctl+0x18e/0x210
> > > do_syscall_64+0xcb/0xf80
> > > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
> > >
> > > other info that might help us debug this:
> > >
> > > Possible unsafe locking scenario:
> > >
> > > CPU0 CPU1
> > > ---- ----
> > > rlock(&mm->mmap_lock);
> > > lock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8);
> > > lock(&mm->mmap_lock);
> > > rlock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8);
> > >
> > > *** DEADLOCK ***
> > >
> > > Both threads are calling blkdev_read_iter(), which uses
> > > inode_lock_shared() to read-lock inode->i_rwsem. I'm not sure why CPU1
> > > shows lock() instead of rlock(). So both threads read-lock
> > > inode->i_rwsem and mmap_lock but in a different order. IIUC, with
> > > read-locks this should not deadlock until some other thread
> > > write-locks the mmap_lock in between and this becomes a real deadlock:
> > >
> > > CPU0 CPU1 CPU2
> > > ---- ---- ----
> > > rlock(&mm->mmap_lock);
> > > rlock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8);
> > > wlock(&mm->mmap_lock) <-- waiting for CPU0
> > > rlock(&mm->mmap_lock); <-- waiting for CPU1
> > > rlock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8); <-- waiting for CPU2
> > >
> > > I believe in the original report this write-locking thread was the one
> > > calling mprotect_fixup().
> > >
> > > Per https://docs.kernel.org/mm/process_addrs.html#lock-ordering,
> > > inode->i_rwsem should be locked before mm->mmap_lock, so
> > > procfs_procmap_ioctl() has to be fixed to follow this lock ordering.
> > > One possibility I can think of is to use build_id_parse_nofault()
> > > first and if it fails because the required page is not faulted, we do
> > > freader_init_from_file(), then drop the mmap/vma lock and execute
> > > freader_fetch() outside of these locks to fault in that page. Once
> > > that's done, we'll retry the whole operation and this time
> > > build_id_parse_nofault() should pass (unless we already evicted that
> > > page, which is extremely unlikely and in that case, we'll retry
> > > again).
> > >
> > > I tried a POC with build_id_parse_nofault() but without the whole
> > > dance with freader_init_from_file/freader_fetch and the deadlock is
> > > gone. Andrii, WDYT?
> >
> > I don't like it :) Too much complexity, _nofault() variant only makes
> > sense for BPF in non-sleepable contexts. I think this can be fixed
> > simpler and cleaner. We don't need to hold VMA lock while fetching
> > build ID. Build ID works with vma's vm_file, so we can just get its
> > reference, drop vma lock, then fetch build id. Below diff passes our
> > BPF selftests. Might need to think about a bit leaner code changes,
> > but the idea should be clear. Diff below will be butchered by gmail,
> > but you can fetch it at [0]. Do you mind validating that deadlock is
> > gone? Thanks!
>
> Sure. I'll test it later today, once I'm home.
With this fix, the issue is not reproducible. Once you post the final
version I can retest it again.
Thanks,
Suren.
>
> >
> > [0] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/andrii/bpf-next.git/commit/?h=procmap-query-vma-deadlock-fix&id=7faf95b63a8a7ac6e78b6d90101c94bfa6ecdfd1
> >
> > Author: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
> > Date: Tue Jan 27 10:46:04 2026 -0800
> >
> > procfs: avoid fetching build ID while holding VMA lock
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/proc/task_mmu.c b/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
> > index 81dfc26bfae8..564bf82e3731 100644
> > --- a/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
> > +++ b/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
> > @@ -656,6 +656,7 @@ static int do_procmap_query(struct mm_struct *mm,
> > void __user *uarg)
> > struct proc_maps_locking_ctx lock_ctx = { .mm = mm };
> > struct procmap_query karg;
> > struct vm_area_struct *vma;
> > + struct file *vm_file = NULL;
> > const char *name = NULL;
> > char build_id_buf[BUILD_ID_SIZE_MAX], *name_buf = NULL;
> > __u64 usize;
> > @@ -720,6 +721,9 @@ static int do_procmap_query(struct mm_struct *mm,
> > void __user *uarg)
> > karg.dev_major = MAJOR(inode->i_sb->s_dev);
> > karg.dev_minor = MINOR(inode->i_sb->s_dev);
> > karg.inode = inode->i_ino;
> > +
> > + if (karg.build_id_size)
> > + vm_file = get_file(vma->vm_file);
> > } else {
> > karg.vma_offset = 0;
> > karg.dev_major = 0;
> > @@ -727,21 +731,6 @@ static int do_procmap_query(struct mm_struct *mm,
> > void __user *uarg)
> > karg.inode = 0;
> > }
> >
> > - if (karg.build_id_size) {
> > - __u32 build_id_sz;
> > -
> > - err = build_id_parse(vma, build_id_buf, &build_id_sz);
> > - if (err) {
> > - karg.build_id_size = 0;
> > - } else {
> > - if (karg.build_id_size < build_id_sz) {
> > - err = -ENAMETOOLONG;
> > - goto out;
> > - }
> > - karg.build_id_size = build_id_sz;
> > - }
> > - }
> > -
> > if (karg.vma_name_size) {
> > size_t name_buf_sz = min_t(size_t, PATH_MAX,
> > karg.vma_name_size);
> > const struct path *path;
> > @@ -779,6 +768,28 @@ static int do_procmap_query(struct mm_struct *mm,
> > void __user *uarg)
> > query_vma_teardown(&lock_ctx);
> > mmput(mm);
> >
> > + if (karg.build_id_size) {
> > + __u32 build_id_sz;
> > +
> > + err = -ENOENT;
> > + if (vm_file)
> > + err = build_id_parse_file(vm_file,
> > build_id_buf, &build_id_sz);
> > + if (err) {
> > + karg.build_id_size = 0;
> > + } else {
> > + if (karg.build_id_size < build_id_sz) {
> > + err = -ENAMETOOLONG;
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > + karg.build_id_size = build_id_sz;
> > + }
> > + }
> > +
> > + if (vm_file) {
> > + fput(vm_file);
> > + vm_file = NULL;
> > + }
> > +
> > if (karg.vma_name_size &&
> > copy_to_user(u64_to_user_ptr(karg.vma_name_addr),
> > name, karg.vma_name_size)) {
> > kfree(name_buf);
> > @@ -797,6 +808,8 @@ static int do_procmap_query(struct mm_struct *mm,
> > void __user *uarg)
> >
> > out:
> > query_vma_teardown(&lock_ctx);
> > + if (vm_file)
> > + fput(vm_file);
> > mmput(mm);
> > kfree(name_buf);
> > return err;
> > diff --git a/include/linux/buildid.h b/include/linux/buildid.h
> > index 831c1b4b626c..7acc06b22fb7 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/buildid.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/buildid.h
> > @@ -7,7 +7,10 @@
> > #define BUILD_ID_SIZE_MAX 20
> >
> > struct vm_area_struct;
> > +struct file;
> > +
> > int build_id_parse(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned char
> > *build_id, __u32 *size);
> > +int build_id_parse_file(struct file *file, unsigned char *build_id,
> > __u32 *size);
> > int build_id_parse_nofault(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned char
> > *build_id, __u32 *size);
> > int build_id_parse_buf(const void *buf, unsigned char *build_id, u32 buf_size);
> >
> > diff --git a/lib/buildid.c b/lib/buildid.c
> > index aaf61dfc0919..c0002129d526 100644
> > --- a/lib/buildid.c
> > +++ b/lib/buildid.c
> > @@ -271,7 +271,7 @@ static int get_build_id_64(struct freader *r,
> > unsigned char *build_id, __u32 *si
> > /* enough for Elf64_Ehdr, Elf64_Phdr, and all the smaller requests */
> > #define MAX_FREADER_BUF_SZ 64
> >
> > -static int __build_id_parse(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned char
> > *build_id,
> > +static int __build_id_parse(struct file *file, unsigned char *build_id,
> > __u32 *size, bool may_fault)
> > {
> > const Elf32_Ehdr *ehdr;
> > @@ -279,11 +279,7 @@ static int __build_id_parse(struct vm_area_struct
> > *vma, unsigned char *build_id,
> > char buf[MAX_FREADER_BUF_SZ];
> > int ret;
> >
> > - /* only works for page backed storage */
> > - if (!vma->vm_file)
> > - return -EINVAL;
> > -
> > - freader_init_from_file(&r, buf, sizeof(buf), vma->vm_file, may_fault);
> > + freader_init_from_file(&r, buf, sizeof(buf), file, may_fault);
> >
> > /* fetch first 18 bytes of ELF header for checks */
> > ehdr = freader_fetch(&r, 0, offsetofend(Elf32_Ehdr, e_type));
> > @@ -324,7 +320,11 @@ static int __build_id_parse(struct vm_area_struct
> > *vma, unsigned char *build_id,
> > */
> > int build_id_parse_nofault(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned char
> > *build_id, __u32 *size)
> > {
> > - return __build_id_parse(vma, build_id, size, false /* !may_fault */);
> > + /* only works for page backed storage */
> > + if (!vma->vm_file)
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > +
> > + return __build_id_parse(vma->vm_file, build_id, size, false /*
> > !may_fault */);
> > }
> >
> > /*
> > @@ -340,7 +340,16 @@ int build_id_parse_nofault(struct vm_area_struct
> > *vma, unsigned char *build_id,
> > */
> > int build_id_parse(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned char
> > *build_id, __u32 *size)
> > {
> > - return __build_id_parse(vma, build_id, size, true /* may_fault */);
> > + /* only works for page backed storage */
> > + if (!vma->vm_file)
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > +
> > + return __build_id_parse(vma->vm_file, build_id, size, true /*
> > may_fault */);
> > +}
> > +
> > +int build_id_parse_file(struct file *file, unsigned char *build_id,
> > __u32 *size)
> > +{
> > + return __build_id_parse(file, build_id, size, true /* may_fault */);
> > }
> >
> > /**
> >
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > [ 62.320932][ T9229]
> > > > [ 62.321471][ T9229] ======================================================
> > > > [ 62.323016][ T9229] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
> > > > [ 62.324618][ T9229] 6.19.0-rc6-00001-g40bea6261b2a #42 Not tainted
> > > > [ 62.326013][ T9229] ------------------------------------------------------
> > > > [ 62.327560][ T9229] hillf/9229 is trying to acquire lock:
> > > > [ 62.328821][ T9229] ffff888145b7b5a8
> > > > (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8){++++}-{4:4}, at:
> > > > blkdev_read_iter+0x2a7/0x4e0
> > > > [ 62.331102][ T9229]
> > > > [ 62.331102][ T9229] but task is already holding lock:
> > > > [ 62.332722][ T9229] ffff888183a6e540 (&mm->mmap_lock){++++}-{4:4},
> > > > at: do_procmap_query+0x39f/0x1050
> > > > [ 62.334795][ T9229]
> > > > [ 62.334795][ T9229] which lock already depends on the new lock.
> > > > [ 62.334795][ T9229]
> > > > [ 62.337072][ T9229]
> > > > [ 62.337072][ T9229] the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
> > > > [ 62.338998][ T9229]
> > > > [ 62.338998][ T9229] -> #1 (&mm->mmap_lock){++++}-{4:4}:
> > > > [ 62.340646][ T9229] __might_fault+0xed/0x170
> > > > [ 62.341763][ T9229] _copy_to_iter+0x118/0x1720
> > > > [ 62.342913][ T9229] copy_page_to_iter+0x12d/0x1e0
> > > > [ 62.344167][ T9229] filemap_read+0x720/0x10a0
> > > > [ 62.345298][ T9229] blkdev_read_iter+0x2b5/0x4e0
> > > > [ 62.346480][ T9229] vfs_read+0x7f4/0xae0
> > > > [ 62.347518][ T9229] ksys_read+0x12a/0x250
> > > > [ 62.348584][ T9229] do_syscall_64+0xcb/0xf80
> > > > [ 62.349707][ T9229] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
> > > > [ 62.351116][ T9229]
> > > > [ 62.351116][ T9229] -> #0 (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8){++++}-{4:4}:
> > > > [ 62.353012][ T9229] __lock_acquire+0x1509/0x26d0
> > > > [ 62.354213][ T9229] lock_acquire+0x185/0x340
> > > > [ 62.355323][ T9229] down_read+0x98/0x490
> > > > [ 62.356441][ T9229] blkdev_read_iter+0x2a7/0x4e0
> > > > [ 62.357619][ T9229] __kernel_read+0x39a/0xa90
> > > > [ 62.358767][ T9229] freader_fetch+0x1d5/0xa80
> > > > [ 62.359927][ T9229] __build_id_parse.isra.0+0xea/0x6a0
> > > > [ 62.361232][ T9229] do_procmap_query+0xd75/0x1050
> > > > [ 62.362434][ T9229] procfs_procmap_ioctl+0x7a/0xb0
> > > > [ 62.363687][ T9229] __x64_sys_ioctl+0x18e/0x210
> > > > [ 62.364863][ T9229] do_syscall_64+0xcb/0xf80
> > > > [ 62.365977][ T9229] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
> > > > [ 62.367394][ T9229]
> > > > [ 62.367394][ T9229] other info that might help us debug this:
> > > > [ 62.367394][ T9229]
> > > > [ 62.369637][ T9229] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
> > > > [ 62.369637][ T9229]
> > > > [ 62.371237][ T9229] CPU0 CPU1
> > > > [ 62.372441][ T9229] ---- ----
> > > > [ 62.373687][ T9229] rlock(&mm->mmap_lock);
> > > > [ 62.374688][ T9229]
> > > > lock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8);
> > > > [ 62.376444][ T9229] lock(&mm->mmap_lock);
> > > > [ 62.377956][ T9229] rlock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8);
> > > > [ 62.379165][ T9229]
> > > > [ 62.379165][ T9229] *** DEADLOCK ***
> > > > [ 62.379165][ T9229]
> > > > [ 62.380952][ T9229] 1 lock held by hillf/9229:
> > > > [ 62.381971][ T9229] #0: ffff888183a6e540
> > > > (&mm->mmap_lock){++++}-{4:4}, at: do_procmap_query+0x39f/0x1050
> > > > [ 62.384162][ T9229]
> > > > [ 62.384162][ T9229] stack backtrace:
> > > > [ 62.385458][ T9229] CPU: 3 UID: 0 PID: 9229 Comm: hillf Not tainted
> > > > 6.19.0-rc6-00001-g40bea6261b2a #42 PREEMPT(full)
> > > > [ 62.385471][ T9229] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX,
> > > > 1996), BIOS 1.17.0-debian-1.17.0-1 04/01/2014
> > > > [ 62.385477][ T9229] Call Trace:
> > > > [ 62.385482][ T9229] <TASK>
> > > > [ 62.385487][ T9229] dump_stack_lvl+0x100/0x190
> > > > [ 62.385505][ T9229] print_circular_bug.cold+0x185/0x1d5
> > > > [ 62.385521][ T9229] check_noncircular+0x14a/0x170
> > > > [ 62.385534][ T9229] __lock_acquire+0x1509/0x26d0
> > > > [ 62.385547][ T9229] lock_acquire+0x185/0x340
> > > > [ 62.385557][ T9229] ? blkdev_read_iter+0x2a7/0x4e0
> > > > [ 62.385569][ T9229] ? __pfx___might_resched+0x10/0x10
> > > > [ 62.385583][ T9229] down_read+0x98/0x490
> > > > [ 62.385593][ T9229] ? blkdev_read_iter+0x2a7/0x4e0
> > > > [ 62.385603][ T9229] ? __pfx_down_read+0x10/0x10
> > > > [ 62.385612][ T9229] ? lock_acquire+0x185/0x340
> > > > [ 62.385622][ T9229] ? is_bpf_text_address+0x25/0x1a0
> > > > [ 62.385634][ T9229] blkdev_read_iter+0x2a7/0x4e0
> > > > [ 62.385645][ T9229] __kernel_read+0x39a/0xa90
> > > > [ 62.385658][ T9229] ? __pfx___kernel_read+0x10/0x10
> > > > [ 62.385671][ T9229] ? __lock_acquire+0x481/0x26d0
> > > > [ 62.385683][ T9229] freader_fetch+0x1d5/0xa80
> > > > [ 62.385697][ T9229] ? find_held_lock+0x2b/0x80
> > > > [ 62.385712][ T9229] ? __pfx_freader_fetch+0x10/0x10
> > > > [ 62.385725][ T9229] ? __asan_memset+0x27/0x50
> > > > [ 62.385737][ T9229] __build_id_parse.isra.0+0xea/0x6a0
> > > > [ 62.385751][ T9229] ? __pfx___build_id_parse.isra.0+0x10/0x10
> > > > [ 62.385766][ T9229] ? __pfx_find_vma+0x10/0x10
> > > > [ 62.385774][ T9229] ? __might_fault+0x129/0x170
> > > > [ 62.385788][ T9229] do_procmap_query+0xd75/0x1050
> > > > [ 62.385798][ T9229] ? __pfx_do_procmap_query+0x10/0x10
> > > > [ 62.385807][ T9229] ? __sanitizer_cov_trace_switch+0x53/0x90
> > > > [ 62.385817][ T9229] ? do_vfs_ioctl+0x226/0x13b0
> > > > [ 62.385828][ T9229] ? __pfx_do_vfs_ioctl+0x10/0x10
> > > > [ 62.385839][ T9229] ? putname+0xfc/0x1b0
> > > > [ 62.385846][ T9229] ? putname+0x101/0x1b0
> > > > [ 62.385857][ T9229] ? __x64_sys_openat+0x143/0x210
> > > > [ 62.385867][ T9229] procfs_procmap_ioctl+0x7a/0xb0
> > > > [ 62.385877][ T9229] ? __pfx_procfs_procmap_ioctl+0x10/0x10
> > > > [ 62.385888][ T9229] __x64_sys_ioctl+0x18e/0x210
> > > > [ 62.385899][ T9229] do_syscall_64+0xcb/0xf80
> > > > [ 62.385913][ T9229] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
> > > > [ 62.385923][ T9229] RIP: 0033:0x412209
> > > > [ 62.385931][ T9229] Code: c0 79 93 eb d5 48 8d 7c 1d 00 eb 99 0f 1f
> > > > 44 00 00 48 89 f8 48 89 f7 48 89 d6 48 89 ca 4d 89 c2 4d 89 c8 4c 8b
> > > > 4c 24 08 0f 05 <48> 3d 01 f0 ff ff 73 01 c3 48 c7 c1 d8 ff ff ff f7 d8
> > > > 64 89 01 48
> > > > [ 62.385940][ T9229] RSP: 002b:00007fff380d5588 EFLAGS: 00000217
> > > > ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000010
> > > > [ 62.385950][ T9229] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00007fff380d56c8
> > > > RCX: 0000000000412209
> > > > [ 62.385956][ T9229] RDX: 0000200000000180 RSI: 00000000c0686611
> > > > RDI: 0000000000000004
> > > > [ 62.385962][ T9229] RBP: 00007fff380d55a0 R08: 0000000000000000
> > > > R09: 00007fff380d5640
> > > > [ 62.385968][ T9229] R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000217
> > > > R12: 00007fff380d56b8
> > > > [ 62.385974][ T9229] R13: 0000000000000002 R14: 00000000004a0e40
> > > > R15: 0000000000000002
> > > > [ 62.385982][ T9229] </TASK>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > > other info that might help us debug this:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Chain exists of:
> > > > > > > &sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8 --> &mm->mmap_lock --> vm_lock
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Possible unsafe locking scenario:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > CPU0 CPU1
> > > > > > > ---- ----
> > > > > > > rlock(vm_lock);
> > > > > > > lock(&mm->mmap_lock);
> > > > > > > lock(vm_lock);
> > > > > > > rlock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8);
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > *** DEADLOCK ***
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 1 lock held by syz.0.17/6091:
> > > > > > > #0: ffff888012aa0448 (vm_lock){++++}-{0:0}, at: lock_next_vma+0x10e/0xed0 mm/mmap_lock.c:334
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > stack backtrace:
> > > > > > > CPU: 2 UID: 0 PID: 6091 Comm: syz.0.17 Not tainted syzkaller #0 PREEMPT(full)
> > > > > > > Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 1.16.3-debian-1.16.3-2~bpo12+1 04/01/2014
> > > > > > > Call Trace:
> > > > > > > <TASK>
> > > > > > > __dump_stack lib/dump_stack.c:94 [inline]
> > > > > > > dump_stack_lvl+0x116/0x1f0 lib/dump_stack.c:120
> > > > > > > print_circular_bug+0x275/0x340 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:2043
> > > > > > > check_noncircular+0x146/0x160 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:2175
> > > > > > > check_prev_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3165 [inline]
> > > > > > > check_prevs_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3284 [inline]
> > > > > > > validate_chain kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3908 [inline]
> > > > > > > __lock_acquire+0x1669/0x2890 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5237
> > > > > > > lock_acquire kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5868 [inline]
> > > > > > > lock_acquire+0x179/0x330 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5825
> > > > > > > down_read+0x9b/0x460 kernel/locking/rwsem.c:1537
> > > > > > > inode_lock_shared include/linux/fs.h:1042 [inline]
> > > > > > > blkdev_read_iter+0x19e/0x500 block/fops.c:855
> > > > > > > __kernel_read+0x3f3/0xbf0 fs/read_write.c:530
> > > > > > > freader_fetch+0x1d7/0x9d0 lib/buildid.c:100
> > > > > > > __build_id_parse.isra.0+0xdd/0x6c0 lib/buildid.c:297
> > > > > > > do_procmap_query+0xb0e/0x1080 fs/proc/task_mmu.c:733
> > > > > > > procfs_procmap_ioctl+0x9d/0xe0 fs/proc/task_mmu.c:813
> > > > > > > vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline]
> > > > > > > __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:597 [inline]
> > > > > > > __se_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:583 [inline]
> > > > > > > __x64_sys_ioctl+0x18e/0x210 fs/ioctl.c:583
> > > > > > > do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline]
> > > > > > > do_syscall_64+0xcd/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94
> > > > > > > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
> > > > > > > RIP: 0033:0x7ff1a238f7c9
> > > > > > > Code: ff ff c3 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 0f 1f 40 00 48 89 f8 48 89 f7 48 89 d6 48 89 ca 4d 89 c2 4d 89 c8 4c 8b 4c 24 08 0f 05 <48> 3d 01 f0 ff ff 73 01 c3 48 c7 c1 a8 ff ff ff f7 d8 64 89 01 48
> > > > > > > RSP: 002b:00007ffebbe538b8 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000010
> > > > > > > RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00007ff1a25e5fa0 RCX: 00007ff1a238f7c9
> > > > > > > RDX: 0000200000000180 RSI: 00000000c0686611 RDI: 0000000000000004
> > > > > > > RBP: 00007ff1a2413f91 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000
> > > > > > > R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 0000000000000000
> > > > > > > R13: 00007ff1a25e5fa0 R14: 00007ff1a25e5fa0 R15: 0000000000000003
> > > > > > > </TASK>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2026-01-28 3:42 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <697400dc.a70a0220.35de72.000a.GAE@google.com>
2026-01-24 11:31 ` [syzbot] [block?] possible deadlock in blkdev_read_iter Hillf Danton
2026-01-26 17:20 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2026-01-26 22:33 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2026-01-27 2:22 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2026-01-27 18:51 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2026-01-27 23:52 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2026-01-28 3:41 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox