4.14-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------ From: Jan Kara <[email protected]> commit b8b784958eccbf8f51ebeee65282ca3fd59ea391 upstream. Syzbot has reported that it can hit a NULL pointer dereference in wb_workfn() due to wb->bdi->dev being NULL. This indicates that wb_workfn() was called for an already unregistered bdi which should not happen as wb_shutdown() called from bdi_unregister() should make sure all pending writeback works are completed before bdi is unregistered. Except that wb_workfn() itself can requeue the work with: mod_delayed_work(bdi_wq, &wb->dwork, 0); and if this happens while wb_shutdown() is waiting in: flush_delayed_work(&wb->dwork); the dwork can get executed after wb_shutdown() has finished and bdi_unregister() has cleared wb->bdi->dev. Make wb_workfn() use wakeup_wb() for requeueing the work which takes all the necessary precautions against racing with bdi unregistration. CC: Tetsuo Handa <[email protected]> CC: Tejun Heo <[email protected]> Fixes: 839a8e8660b6777e7fe4e80af1a048aebe2b5977 Reported-by: syzbot <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Dave Chinner <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]> --- fs/fs-writeback.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) --- a/fs/fs-writeback.c +++ b/fs/fs-writeback.c @@ -1940,7 +1940,7 @@ void wb_workfn(struct work_struct *work) } if (!list_empty(&wb->work_list)) - mod_delayed_work(bdi_wq, &wb->dwork, 0); + wb_wakeup(wb); else if (wb_has_dirty_io(wb) && dirty_writeback_interval) wb_wakeup_delayed(wb);
