CVE-2024-48875

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

btrfs: don't take dev_replace rwsem on task already holding it

Running fstests btrfs/011 with MKFS_OPTIONS="-O rst" to force the usage of the RAID stripe-tree, we get the following splat from lockdep:

BTRFS info (device sdd): dev_replace from /dev/sdd (devid 1) to /dev/sdb started

============================================ WARNING: possible recursive locking detected 6.11.0-rc3-btrfs-for-next #599 Not tainted

btrfs/2326 is trying to acquire lock: ffff88810f215c98 (&fs_info->dev_replace.rwsem){++++}-{3:3}, at: btrfs_map_block+0x39f/0x2250

but task is already holding lock: ffff88810f215c98 (&fs_info->dev_replace.rwsem){++++}-{3:3}, at: btrfs_map_block+0x39f/0x2250

other info that might help us debug this: Possible unsafe locking scenario:

    CPU0
    ----

lock(&fs_info->dev_replace.rwsem); lock(&fs_info->dev_replace.rwsem);

*** DEADLOCK ***

May be due to missing lock nesting notation

1 lock held by btrfs/2326: #0: ffff88810f215c98 (&fs_info->dev_replace.rwsem){++++}-{3:3}, at: btrfs_map_block+0x39f/0x2250

stack backtrace: CPU: 1 UID: 0 PID: 2326 Comm: btrfs Not tainted 6.11.0-rc3-btrfs-for-next #599 Hardware name: Bochs Bochs, BIOS Bochs 01/01/2011 Call Trace: <TASK> dump_stack_lvl+0x5b/0x80 __lock_acquire+0x2798/0x69d0 ? __pfx___lock_acquire+0x10/0x10 ? __pfx___lock_acquire+0x10/0x10 lock_acquire+0x19d/0x4a0 ? btrfs_map_block+0x39f/0x2250 ? __pfx_lock_acquire+0x10/0x10 ? find_held_lock+0x2d/0x110 ? lock_is_held_type+0x8f/0x100 down_read+0x8e/0x440 ? btrfs_map_block+0x39f/0x2250 ? __pfx_down_read+0x10/0x10 ? do_raw_read_unlock+0x44/0x70 ? _raw_read_unlock+0x23/0x40 btrfs_map_block+0x39f/0x2250 ? btrfs_dev_replace_by_ioctl+0xd69/0x1d00 ? btrfs_bio_counter_inc_blocked+0xd9/0x2e0 ? __kasan_slab_alloc+0x6e/0x70 ? __pfx_btrfs_map_block+0x10/0x10 ? __pfx_btrfs_bio_counter_inc_blocked+0x10/0x10 ? kmem_cache_alloc_noprof+0x1f2/0x300 ? mempool_alloc_noprof+0xed/0x2b0 btrfs_submit_chunk+0x28d/0x17e0 ? __pfx_btrfs_submit_chunk+0x10/0x10 ? bvec_alloc+0xd7/0x1b0 ? bio_add_folio+0x171/0x270 ? __pfx_bio_add_folio+0x10/0x10 ? __kasan_check_read+0x20/0x20 btrfs_submit_bio+0x37/0x80 read_extent_buffer_pages+0x3df/0x6c0 btrfs_read_extent_buffer+0x13e/0x5f0 read_tree_block+0x81/0xe0 read_block_for_search+0x4bd/0x7a0 ? __pfx_read_block_for_search+0x10/0x10 btrfs_search_slot+0x78d/0x2720 ? __pfx_btrfs_search_slot+0x10/0x10 ? lock_is_held_type+0x8f/0x100 ? kasan_save_track+0x14/0x30 ? __kasan_slab_alloc+0x6e/0x70 ? kmem_cache_alloc_noprof+0x1f2/0x300 btrfs_get_raid_extent_offset+0x181/0x820 ? __pfx_lock_acquire+0x10/0x10 ? __pfx_btrfs_get_raid_extent_offset+0x10/0x10 ? down_read+0x194/0x440 ? __pfx_down_read+0x10/0x10 ? do_raw_read_unlock+0x44/0x70 ? _raw_read_unlock+0x23/0x40 btrfs_map_block+0x5b5/0x2250 ? __pfx_btrfs_map_block+0x10/0x10 scrub_submit_initial_read+0x8fe/0x11b0 ? __pfx_scrub_submit_initial_read+0x10/0x10 submit_initial_group_read+0x161/0x3a0 ? lock_release+0x20e/0x710 ? __pfx_submit_initial_group_read+0x10/0x10 ? __pfx_lock_release+0x10/0x10 scrub_simple_mirror.isra.0+0x3eb/0x580 scrub_stripe+0xe4d/0x1440 ? lock_release+0x20e/0x710 ? __pfx_scrub_stripe+0x10/0x10 ? __pfx_lock_release+0x10/0x10 ? do_raw_read_unlock+0x44/0x70 ? _raw_read_unlock+0x23/0x40 scrub_chunk+0x257/0x4a0 scrub_enumerate_chunks+0x64c/0xf70 ? __mutex_unlock_slowpath+0x147/0x5f0 ? __pfx_scrub_enumerate_chunks+0x10/0x10 ? bit_wait_timeout+0xb0/0x170 ? __up_read+0x189/0x700 ? scrub_workers_get+0x231/0x300 ? up_write+0x490/0x4f0 btrfs_scrub_dev+0x52e/0xcd0 ? create_pending_snapshots+0x230/0x250 ? __pfx_btrfs_scrub_dev+0x10/0x10 btrfs_dev_replace_by_ioctl+0xd69/0x1d00 ? lock_acquire+0x19d/0x4a0 ? __pfx_btrfs_dev_replace_by_ioctl+0x10/0x10 ? ---truncated---

The CVSS score(s) listed for this vulnerability do not reflect the associated product's status, and are included for informational purposes to better understand the severity of this vulnerability.