commit 803d7143748976653baf72be77420234d6aba4e4
author Sungjong Seo <sj1557.seo@samsung.com> Fri Jul 14 23:45:15 2023 +0900
committer Namjae Jeon <linkinjeon@kernel.org> Sat Jul 15 23:12:22 2023 +0900
tree 5ee6427a4c46b6849e746f8e3f63ec20d5e3a51b
parent 0bf9ccffd2f90dfdd6a26814e77750c68d4598e6

exfat: release s_lock before calling dir_emit()

There is a potential deadlock reported by syzbot as below:

======================================================
WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
6.4.0-next-20230707-syzkaller #0 Not tainted
------------------------------------------------------
syz-executor330/5073 is trying to acquire lock:
ffff8880218527a0 (&mm->mmap_lock){++++}-{3:3}, at: mmap_read_lock_killable include/linux/mmap_lock.h:151 [inline]
ffff8880218527a0 (&mm->mmap_lock){++++}-{3:3}, at: get_mmap_lock_carefully mm/memory.c:5293 [inline]
ffff8880218527a0 (&mm->mmap_lock){++++}-{3:3}, at: lock_mm_and_find_vma+0x369/0x510 mm/memory.c:5344
but task is already holding lock:
ffff888019f760e0 (&sbi->s_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: exfat_iterate+0x117/0xb50 fs/exfat/dir.c:232

which lock already depends on the new lock.

Chain exists of:
  &mm->mmap_lock --> mapping.invalidate_lock#3 --> &sbi->s_lock

 Possible unsafe locking scenario:

       CPU0                    CPU1
       ----                    ----
  lock(&sbi->s_lock);
                               lock(mapping.invalidate_lock#3);
                               lock(&sbi->s_lock);
  rlock(&mm->mmap_lock);

Let's try to avoid above potential deadlock condition by moving dir_emit*()
out of sbi->s_lock coverage.

Fixes: ca06197382bd ("exfat: add directory operations")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org #v5.7+
Reported-by: syzbot+1741a5d9b79989c10bdc@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/00000000000078ee7e060066270b@google.com/T/#u
Signed-off-by: Sungjong Seo <sj1557.seo@samsung.com>
Signed-off-by: Namjae Jeon <linkinjeon@kernel.org>