btrfs: zoned: traverse devices under chunk_mutex in btrfs_can_activat…

…e_zone

btrfs_can_activate_zone() can be called with the device_list_mutex already
held, which will lead to a deadlock:

insert_dev_extents() // Takes device_list_mutex
`-> insert_dev_extent()
 `-> btrfs_insert_empty_item()
  `-> btrfs_insert_empty_items()
   `-> btrfs_search_slot()
    `-> btrfs_cow_block()
     `-> __btrfs_cow_block()
      `-> btrfs_alloc_tree_block()
       `-> btrfs_reserve_extent()
        `-> find_free_extent()
         `-> find_free_extent_update_loop()
          `-> can_allocate_chunk()
           `-> btrfs_can_activate_zone() // Takes device_list_mutex again

Instead of using the RCU on fs_devices->device_list we
can use fs_devices->alloc_list, protected by the chunk_mutex to traverse
the list of active devices.

We are in the chunk allocation thread. The newer chunk allocation
happens from the devices in the fs_device->alloc_list protected by the
chunk_mutex.

  btrfs_create_chunk()
    lockdep_assert_held(&info->chunk_mutex);
    gather_device_info
      list_for_each_entry(device, &fs_devices->alloc_list, dev_alloc_list)

Also, a device that reappears after the mount won't join the alloc_list
yet and, it will be in the dev_list, which we don't want to consider in
the context of the chunk alloc.

  [15.166572] WARNING: possible recursive locking detected
  [15.167117] 5.17.0-rc6-dennis #79 Not tainted
  [15.167487] --------------------------------------------
  [15.167733] kworker/u8:3/146 is trying to acquire lock:
  [15.167733] ffff888102962ee0 (&fs_devs->device_list_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: find_free_extent+0x15a/0x14f0 [btrfs]
  [15.167733]
  [15.167733] but task is already holding lock:
  [15.167733] ffff888102962ee0 (&fs_devs->device_list_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: btrfs_create_pending_block_groups+0x20a/0x560 [btrfs]
  [15.167733]
  [15.167733] other info that might help us debug this:
  [15.167733]  Possible unsafe locking scenario:
  [15.167733]
  [15.171834]        CPU0
  [15.171834]        ----
  [15.171834]   lock(&fs_devs->device_list_mutex);
  [15.171834]   lock(&fs_devs->device_list_mutex);
  [15.171834]
  [15.171834]  *** DEADLOCK ***
  [15.171834]
  [15.171834]  May be due to missing lock nesting notation
  [15.171834]
  [15.171834] 5 locks held by kworker/u8:3/146:
  [15.171834]  #0: ffff888100050938 ((wq_completion)events_unbound){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: process_one_work+0x1c3/0x5a0
  [15.171834]  #1: ffffc9000067be80 ((work_completion)(&fs_info->async_data_reclaim_work)){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: process_one_work+0x1c3/0x5a0
  [15.176244]  #2: ffff88810521e620 (sb_internal){.+.+}-{0:0}, at: flush_space+0x335/0x600 [btrfs]
  [15.176244]  #3: ffff888102962ee0 (&fs_devs->device_list_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: btrfs_create_pending_block_groups+0x20a/0x560 [btrfs]
  [15.176244]  #4: ffff8881152e4b78 (btrfs-dev-00){++++}-{3:3}, at: __btrfs_tree_lock+0x27/0x130 [btrfs]
  [15.179641]
  [15.179641] stack backtrace:
  [15.179641] CPU: 1 PID: 146 Comm: kworker/u8:3 Not tainted 5.17.0-rc6-dennis #79
  [15.179641] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.15.0-1.fc35 04/01/2014
  [15.179641] Workqueue: events_unbound btrfs_async_reclaim_data_space [btrfs]
  [15.179641] Call Trace:
  [15.179641]  <TASK>
  [15.179641]  dump_stack_lvl+0x45/0x59
  [15.179641]  __lock_acquire.cold+0x217/0x2b2
  [15.179641]  lock_acquire+0xbf/0x2b0
  [15.183838]  ? find_free_extent+0x15a/0x14f0 [btrfs]
  [15.183838]  __mutex_lock+0x8e/0x970
  [15.183838]  ? find_free_extent+0x15a/0x14f0 [btrfs]
  [15.183838]  ? find_free_extent+0x15a/0x14f0 [btrfs]
  [15.183838]  ? lock_is_held_type+0xd7/0x130
  [15.183838]  ? find_free_extent+0x15a/0x14f0 [btrfs]
  [15.183838]  find_free_extent+0x15a/0x14f0 [btrfs]
  [15.183838]  ? _raw_spin_unlock+0x24/0x40
  [15.183838]  ? btrfs_get_alloc_profile+0x106/0x230 [btrfs]
  [15.187601]  btrfs_reserve_extent+0x131/0x260 [btrfs]
  [15.187601]  btrfs_alloc_tree_block+0xb5/0x3b0 [btrfs]
  [15.187601]  __btrfs_cow_block+0x138/0x600 [btrfs]
  [15.187601]  btrfs_cow_block+0x10f/0x230 [btrfs]
  [15.187601]  btrfs_search_slot+0x55f/0xbc0 [btrfs]
  [15.187601]  ? lock_is_held_type+0xd7/0x130
  [15.187601]  btrfs_insert_empty_items+0x2d/0x60 [btrfs]
  [15.187601]  btrfs_create_pending_block_groups+0x2b3/0x560 [btrfs]
  [15.187601]  __btrfs_end_transaction+0x36/0x2a0 [btrfs]
  [15.192037]  flush_space+0x374/0x600 [btrfs]
  [15.192037]  ? find_held_lock+0x2b/0x80
  [15.192037]  ? btrfs_async_reclaim_data_space+0x49/0x180 [btrfs]
  [15.192037]  ? lock_release+0x131/0x2b0
  [15.192037]  btrfs_async_reclaim_data_space+0x70/0x180 [btrfs]
  [15.192037]  process_one_work+0x24c/0x5a0
  [15.192037]  worker_thread+0x4a/0x3d0

Fixes: a85f05e ("btrfs: zoned: avoid chunk allocation if active block group has enough space")
CC: [email protected] # 5.16+
Reviewed-by: Anand Jain <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Johannes Thumshirn <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: David Sterba <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <[email protected]>

fs/btrfs/zoned.c

@@ -1976,18 +1976,19 @@ int btrfs_zone_finish(struct btrfs_block_group *block_group)
 
 bool btrfs_can_activate_zone(struct btrfs_fs_devices *fs_devices, u64 flags)
 {
+	struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info = fs_devices->fs_info;
 	struct btrfs_device *device;
 	bool ret = false;
 
-	if (!btrfs_is_zoned(fs_devices->fs_info))
+	if (!btrfs_is_zoned(fs_info))
 		return true;
 
 	/* Non-single profiles are not supported yet */
 	ASSERT((flags & BTRFS_BLOCK_GROUP_PROFILE_MASK) == 0);
 
 	/* Check if there is a device with active zones left */
-	mutex_lock(&fs_devices->device_list_mutex);
-	list_for_each_entry(device, &fs_devices->devices, dev_list) {
+	mutex_lock(&fs_info->chunk_mutex);
+	list_for_each_entry(device, &fs_devices->alloc_list, dev_alloc_list) {
 		struct btrfs_zoned_device_info *zinfo = device->zone_info;
 
 		if (!device->bdev)
@@ -1999,7 +2000,7 @@ bool btrfs_can_activate_zone(struct btrfs_fs_devices *fs_devices, u64 flags)
 			break;
 		}
 	}
-	mutex_unlock(&fs_devices->device_list_mutex);
+	mutex_unlock(&fs_info->chunk_mutex);
 
 	return ret;
 }