Date:   Wed, 22 Feb 2023 10:34:42 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To:     Schspa Shi <schspa@gmail.com>
Cc:     Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>,
        Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com,
        syzbot <syzbot+6cd18e123583550cf469@syzkaller.appspotmail.com>,
        Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com>
Subject: Re: [syzbot] WARNING: locking bug in umh_complete
Message-ID: <Y/Xhsna3gfadzAAk@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <9d9b9652-c1ac-58e9-2eab-9256c17b1da2@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
 <7d1021f1-c88e-5a03-3b92-087f9be37491@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
 <Y9z76ZLe4On96xIN@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <Y9z+SerR8mlZYo16@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <6c47dbcf-2a17-6bb2-719b-841d851c603b@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
 <Y90ar35uKQoUrLEK@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <caa13441-5f95-b7d6-dd5d-1cf49e709714@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
 <Y+Eh9CFdTwwv+hot@bombadil.infradead.org>
 <Y+pWzult7UDgoilC@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <m21qmkahoj.fsf@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <m21qmkahoj.fsf@gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 10:31:58AM +0800, Schspa Shi wrote:
> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> writes:

> > If so, perhaps the simplest rule would to be ensure there is an
> > unconditional uninterruptible wait-for-completion() before going out of
> > scope.
> >
> > This latter can be spelled like wait_for_completion() or
> > wait_for_completion_state(TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE). More specifically,
> > TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE and TASK_WAKEKILL must not be set in the state mask
> > for the wait to be uninterruptible.
> >
> > If it cannot be proven, raise a warning and audit or somesuch.
> 
> This is a good suggestion. I have written a SmPL patch to complete this
> check, and now I need to rule out the situation that the driver has
> added an additional lock to protect it.
> 
> And I have found a lot of bad usage, should we consider adding a new
> helper API to simplify the fix this?

Please first share some of the locations where this would be applied.