Re: [PATCH] nbd: don't warn when reclassifying a busy socket lock

Hillf Danton <[email protected]> Mon, 20 Jul 2026 10:39:17 +0800

Newsgroups	org.kernel.vger.linux-block,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel
Message-ID	<[email protected]>

On Mon, 20 Jul 2026 10:23:43 +0800 Hillf Danton wrote:
>On Sun, Jun 28, 2026 at 10:29 PM Hillf Danton <[email protected]> wrote:
>> For archive purpose, syzbot report [1] where udp was not invovled defies
>> what is fixed in d532cddb6c60 ("nbd: Reclassify sockets to avoid lockdep
>> circular dependency") -- "Since the UDP socket and the NBD TCP/TLS socket
>> are different, this is a false positive."
>>
>>
>> [1] Subject: [syzbot] [net?] possible deadlock in inet_shutdown (3)
>> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/
>>
>For archive purpose, syzbot report [2] shows deadlock without either udp or
>tcp invovled. But it sounds false positive because kernfs node is removed
>while the filesystem is filling super block.
>
>[2] Subject: [syzbot] [kernfs?] possible deadlock in kernfs_remove_by_name_ns (2)
>https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/
>
For archive purpose, syzbot reports [3,4] show deadlock without either udp or
tcp invovled.

[3] Subject: [syzbot] [kernfs?] possible deadlock in kernfs_iop_permission (2)
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/

[4] Subject: [syzbot] [kernel?] possible deadlock in netif_reset_xps_queues_gt (3)
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/