commit f1037ec0 upstream.

The daxctl unit test for the dax_kmem driver currently triggers the
(false positive) lockdep splat below.  It results from the fact that
remove_memory_block_devices() is invoked under the mem_hotplug_lock()
causing lockdep entanglements with cpu_hotplug_lock() and sysfs (kernfs
active state tracking).  It is a false positive because the sysfs
attribute path triggering the memory remove is not the same attribute
path associated with memory-block device.

sysfs_break_active_protection() is not applicable since there is no real
deadlock conflict, instead move memory-block device removal outside the
lock.  The mem_hotplug_lock() is not needed to synchronize the
memory-block device removal vs the page online state, that is already
handled by lock_device_hotplug().  Specifically, lock_device_hotplug()
is sufficient to allow try_remove_memory() to check the offline state of
the memblocks and be assured that any in progress online attempts are
flushed / blocked by kernfs_drain() / attribute removal.

The add_memory() path safely creates memblock devices under the
mem_hotplug_lock().  There is no kernfs active state synchronization in
the memblock device_register() path, so nothing to fix there.

This change is only possible thanks to the recent change that refactored
memory block device removal out of arch_remove_memory() (commit
4c4b7f9b "mm/memory_hotplug: remove memory block devices before
arch_remove_memory()"), and David's due diligence tracking down the
guarantees afforded by kernfs_drain().  Not flagged for -stable since
this only impacts ongoing development and lockdep validation, not a
runtime issue.

    ======================================================
    WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
    5.5.0-rc3+ #230 Tainted: G           OE
    ------------------------------------------------------
    lt-daxctl/6459 is trying to acquire lock:
    ffff99c7f0003510 (kn->count#241){++++}, at: kernfs_remove_by_name_ns+0x41/0x80

    but task is already holding lock:
    ffffffffa76a5450 (mem_hotplug_lock.rw_sem){++++}, at: percpu_down_write+0x20/0xe0

    which lock already depends on the new lock.

    the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:

    -> #2 (mem_hotplug_lock.rw_sem){++++}:
           __lock_acquire+0x39c/0x790
           lock_acquire+0xa2/0x1b0
           get_online_mems+0x3e/0xb0
           kmem_cache_create_usercopy+0x2e/0x260
           kmem_cache_create+0x12/0x20
           ptlock_cache_init+0x20/0x28
           start_kernel+0x243/0x547
           secondary_startup_64+0xb6/0xc0

    -> #1 (cpu_hotplug_lock.rw_sem){++++}:
           __lock_acquire+0x39c/0x790
           lock_acquire+0xa2/0x1b0
           cpus_read_lock+0x3e/0xb0
           online_pages+0x37/0x300
           memory_subsys_online+0x17d/0x1c0
           device_online+0x60/0x80
           state_store+0x65/0xd0
           kernfs_fop_write+0xcf/0x1c0
           vfs_write+0xdb/0x1d0
           ksys_write+0x65/0xe0
           do_syscall_64+0x5c/0xa0
           entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x49/0xbe

    -> #0 (kn->count#241){++++}:
           check_prev_add+0x98/0xa40
           validate_chain+0x576/0x860
           __lock_acquire+0x39c/0x790
           lock_acquire+0xa2/0x1b0
           __kernfs_remove+0x25f/0x2e0
           kernfs_remove_by_name_ns+0x41/0x80
           remove_files.isra.0+0x30/0x70
           sysfs_remove_group+0x3d/0x80
           sysfs_remove_groups+0x29/0x40
           device_remove_attrs+0x39/0x70
           device_del+0x16a/0x3f0
           device_unregister+0x16/0x60
           remove_memory_block_devices+0x82/0xb0
           try_remove_memory+0xb5/0x130
           remove_memory+0x26/0x40
           dev_dax_kmem_remove+0x44/0x6a [kmem]
           device_release_driver_internal+0xe4/0x1c0
           unbind_store+0xef/0x120
           kernfs_fop_write+0xcf/0x1c0
           vfs_write+0xdb/0x1d0
           ksys_write+0x65/0xe0
           do_syscall_64+0x5c/0xa0
           entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x49/0xbe

    other info that might help us debug this:

    Chain exists of:
      kn->count#241 --> cpu_hotplug_lock.rw_sem --> mem_hotplug_lock.rw_sem

     Possible unsafe locking scenario:

           CPU0                    CPU1
           ----                    ----
      lock(mem_hotplug_lock.rw_sem);
                                   lock(cpu_hotplug_lock.rw_sem);
                                   lock(mem_hotplug_lock.rw_sem);
      lock(kn->count#241);

     *** DEADLOCK ***

No fixes tag as this has been a long standing issue that predated the
addition of kernfs lockdep annotations.

Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/157991441887.2763922.4770790047389427325.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.comSigned-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Cc: Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@intel.com>
Cc: Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@soleen.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>