Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-121434-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:4601:e00::3;
Message-ID: <895193c7-1339-45b3-99fa-6fc804040a3c@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2024 23:25:14 +0900
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [syzbot] [kernel?] possible deadlock in console_flush_all (2)
Content-Language: en-US
To: John Ogness <john.ogness@linutronix.de>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Cc: syzbot <syzbot+f78380e4eae53c64125c@syzkaller.appspotmail.com>,
        syzkaller-bugs <syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>, Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@chromium.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>
References: <000000000000e40a2906072e9567@google.com>
 <ab273ae2-80ec-45da-910a-e74298c71d50@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
 <CAADnVQLmLMt2bF9aAB26dtBCvy2oUFt+AAKDRgTTrc7Xk_zxJQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <596aad11-ee69-4ef1-b945-7b67a9fb22d7@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
 <CAADnVQL6Q3k0+-5X3Xjov7W_xESxkmVXcsCxQRWitQvhTBsf7A@mail.gmail.com>
 <dd264bf7-821b-4cf4-802b-60ae3c7b83bd@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
 <CAADnVQJt+aP=Zo4edCu4iQEmdQjiruR1pJn0qyZZboNym+zd0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <87o7b0szno.fsf@jogness.linutronix.de>
From: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
In-Reply-To: <87o7b0szno.fsf@jogness.linutronix.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 2024/03/27 20:05, John Ogness wrote:
> The printk rework (which is not yet fully mainline) will correctly
> handle this context.
> 
> As to the patch [0] you suggested, it would be more appropriate to
> perform deferred_enter/_exit *within* the locked critical section. But
> we really only want these whack-a-mole workarounds for cases that can
> occur in a non-bug situation. IMHO this is not such a case and falls
> into the category of "known problem, the rework will handle it".
> 
> John Ogness
> 
> [0] https://syzkaller.appspot.com/text?tag=Patch&x=121c92fe180000
> 

Since the cause of current flood of lockdep reports is already explained
in https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=c4f4d25859c2e5859988 , we don't
need [0] for now. But it is unfortunate that the message which explains
what went wrong cannot be reported due to reporting console_lock dependency.
Therefore, I intend [0] as a workaround for a bug situation. We can revert [0]
after the printk rework completed.