In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bpf, sockmap: Fix af_unix iter deadlock bpf_iter_unix_seq_show() may deadlock when lock_sock_fast() takes the fast path and the iter prog attempts to update a sockmap. Which ends up spinning at sock_map_update_elem()'s bh_lock_sock(): WARNING: possible recursive locking detected test_progs/1393 is trying to acquire lock: ffff88811ec25f58 (slock-AF_UNIX){+...}-{3:3}, at: sock_map_update_elem+0xdb/0x1f0 but task is already holding lock: ffff88811ec25f58 (slock-AF_UNIX){+...}-{3:3}, at: __lock_sock_fast+0x37/0xe0 other info that might help us debug this: Possible unsafe locking scenario: CPU0 ---- lock(slock-AF_UNIX); lock(slock-AF_UNIX); *** DEADLOCK *** May be due to missing lock nesting notation 4 locks held by test_progs/1393: #0: ffff88814b59c790 (&p->lock){+.+.}-{4:4}, at: bpf_seq_read+0x59/0x10d0 #1: ffff88811ec25fd8 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: bpf_seq_read+0x42c/0x10d0 #2: ffff88811ec25f58 (slock-AF_UNIX){+...}-{3:3}, at: __lock_sock_fast+0x37/0xe0 #3: ffffffff85a6a7c0 (rcu_read_lock){....}-{1:3}, at: bpf_iter_run_prog+0x51d/0xb00 Call Trace: dump_stack_lvl+0x5d/0x80 print_deadlock_bug.cold+0xc0/0xce __lock_acquire+0x130f/0x2590 lock_acquire+0x14e/0x2b0 _raw_spin_lock+0x30/0x40 sock_map_update_elem+0xdb/0x1f0 bpf_prog_2d0075e5d9b721cd_dump_unix+0x55/0x4f4 bpf_iter_run_prog+0x5b9/0xb00 bpf_iter_unix_seq_show+0x1f7/0x2e0 bpf_seq_read+0x42c/0x10d0 vfs_read+0x171/0xb20 ksys_read+0xff/0x200 do_syscall_64+0x6b/0x3a0 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e