inotify: Fix possible deadlock in fsnotify_destroy_mark

[Syzbot reported]
WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
6.11.0-rc4-syzkaller-00019-gb311c1b497e5 #0 Not tainted
------------------------------------------------------
kswapd0/78 is trying to acquire lock:
ffff88801b8d8930 (&group->mark_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: fsnotify_group_lock include/linux/fsnotify_backend.h:270 [inline]
ffff88801b8d8930 (&group->mark_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: fsnotify_destroy_mark+0x38/0x3c0 fs/notify/mark.c:578

but task is already holding lock:
ffffffff8ea2fd60 (fs_reclaim){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: balance_pgdat mm/vmscan.c:6841 [inline]
ffffffff8ea2fd60 (fs_reclaim){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: kswapd+0xbb4/0x35a0 mm/vmscan.c:7223

which lock already depends on the new lock.

the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:

-> #1 (fs_reclaim){+.+.}-{0:0}:
       ...
       kmem_cache_alloc_noprof+0x3d/0x2a0 mm/slub.c:4044
       inotify_new_watch fs/notify/inotify/inotify_user.c:599 [inline]
       inotify_update_watch fs/notify/inotify/inotify_user.c:647 [inline]
       __do_sys_inotify_add_watch fs/notify/inotify/inotify_user.c:786 [inline]
       __se_sys_inotify_add_watch+0x72e/0x1070 fs/notify/inotify/inotify_user.c:729
       do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/common.c:52 [inline]
       do_syscall_64+0xf3/0x230 arch/x86/entry/common.c:83
       entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f

-> #0 (&group->mark_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}:
       ...
       __mutex_lock+0x136/0xd70 kernel/locking/mutex.c:752
       fsnotify_group_lock include/linux/fsnotify_backend.h:270 [inline]
       fsnotify_destroy_mark+0x38/0x3c0 fs/notify/mark.c:578
       fsnotify_destroy_marks+0x14a/0x660 fs/notify/mark.c:934
       fsnotify_inoderemove include/linux/fsnotify.h:264 [inline]
       dentry_unlink_inode+0x2e0/0x430 fs/dcache.c:403
       __dentry_kill+0x20d/0x630 fs/dcache.c:610
       shrink_kill+0xa9/0x2c0 fs/dcache.c:1055
       shrink_dentry_list+0x2c0/0x5b0 fs/dcache.c:1082
       prune_dcache_sb+0x10f/0x180 fs/dcache.c:1163
       super_cache_scan+0x34f/0x4b0 fs/super.c:221
       do_shrink_slab+0x701/0x1160 mm/shrinker.c:435
       shrink_slab+0x1093/0x14d0 mm/shrinker.c:662
       shrink_one+0x43b/0x850 mm/vmscan.c:4815
       shrink_many mm/vmscan.c:4876 [inline]
       lru_gen_shrink_node mm/vmscan.c:4954 [inline]
       shrink_node+0x3799/0x3de0 mm/vmscan.c:5934
       kswapd_shrink_node mm/vmscan.c:6762 [inline]
       balance_pgdat mm/vmscan.c:6954 [inline]
       kswapd+0x1bcd/0x35a0 mm/vmscan.c:7223

[Analysis]
The problem is that inotify_new_watch() is using GFP_KERNEL to allocate
new watches under group->mark_mutex, however if dentry reclaim races
with unlinking of an inode, it can end up dropping the last dentry reference
for an unlinked inode resulting in removal of fsnotify mark from reclaim
context which wants to acquire group->mark_mutex as well.

This scenario shows that all notification groups are in principle prone
to this kind of a deadlock (previously, we considered only fanotify and
dnotify to be problematic for other reasons) so make sure all
allocations under group->mark_mutex happen with GFP_NOFS.

Reported-and-tested-by: syzbot+c679f13773f295d2da53@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Closes: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=c679f13773f295d2da53
Signed-off-by: Lizhi Xu <lizhi.xu@windriver.com>
Reviewed-by: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20240927143642.2369508-1-lizhi.xu@windriver.com

1 files changed, 3 insertions, 7 deletions

diff --git a/include/linux/fsnotify_backend.h b/include/linux/fsnotify_backend.h
index 8be029bc50b1..3ecf7768e577 100644
--- a/include/linux/fsnotify_backend.h
+++ b/include/linux/fsnotify_backend.h
@@ -217,7 +217,6 @@ struct fsnotify_group {
 
 #define FSNOTIFY_GROUP_USER	0x01 /* user allocated group */
 #define FSNOTIFY_GROUP_DUPS	0x02 /* allow multiple marks per object */
-#define FSNOTIFY_GROUP_NOFS	0x04 /* group lock is not direct reclaim safe */
 	int flags;
 	unsigned int owner_flags;	/* stored flags of mark_mutex owner */
 
@@ -268,22 +267,19 @@ struct fsnotify_group {
 static inline void fsnotify_group_lock(struct fsnotify_group *group)
 {
 	mutex_lock(&group->mark_mutex);
-	if (group->flags & FSNOTIFY_GROUP_NOFS)
-		group->owner_flags = memalloc_nofs_save();
+	group->owner_flags = memalloc_nofs_save();
 }
 
 static inline void fsnotify_group_unlock(struct fsnotify_group *group)
 {
-	if (group->flags & FSNOTIFY_GROUP_NOFS)
-		memalloc_nofs_restore(group->owner_flags);
+	memalloc_nofs_restore(group->owner_flags);
 	mutex_unlock(&group->mark_mutex);
 }
 
 static inline void fsnotify_group_assert_locked(struct fsnotify_group *group)
 {
 	WARN_ON_ONCE(!mutex_is_locked(&group->mark_mutex));
-	if (group->flags & FSNOTIFY_GROUP_NOFS)
-		WARN_ON_ONCE(!(current->flags & PF_MEMALLOC_NOFS));
+	WARN_ON_ONCE(!(current->flags & PF_MEMALLOC_NOFS));
 }
 
 /* When calling fsnotify tell it if the data is a path or inode */