From: Greg <gvrose8192@gmail.com>
To: intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org
Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH v2] PCI: lock each enable/disable num_vfs operation in sysfs
Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2017 15:17:42 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1483744662.3868.1.camel@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170106215908.20736.34632.stgit@localhost6.localdomain6>
On Fri, 2017-01-06 at 13:59 -0800, Emil Tantilov wrote:
> Enabling/disabling SRIOV via sysfs by echo-ing multiple values
> simultaneously:
>
> echo 63 > /sys/class/net/ethX/device/sriov_numvfs&
> echo 63 > /sys/class/net/ethX/device/sriov_numvfs
>
> sleep 5
>
> echo 0 > /sys/class/net/ethX/device/sriov_numvfs&
> echo 0 > /sys/class/net/ethX/device/sriov_numvfs
>
> Results in the following bug:
>
> kernel BUG at drivers/pci/iov.c:495!
> invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP
> CPU: 1 PID: 8050 Comm: bash Tainted: G W 4.9.0-rc7-net-next #2092
> RIP: 0010:[<ffffffff813b1647>]
> [<ffffffff813b1647>] pci_iov_release+0x57/0x60
>
> Call Trace:
> [<ffffffff81391726>] pci_release_dev+0x26/0x70
> [<ffffffff8155be6e>] device_release+0x3e/0xb0
> [<ffffffff81365ee7>] kobject_cleanup+0x67/0x180
> [<ffffffff81365d9d>] kobject_put+0x2d/0x60
> [<ffffffff8155bc27>] put_device+0x17/0x20
> [<ffffffff8139c08a>] pci_dev_put+0x1a/0x20
> [<ffffffff8139cb6b>] pci_get_dev_by_id+0x5b/0x90
> [<ffffffff8139cca5>] pci_get_subsys+0x35/0x40
> [<ffffffff8139ccc8>] pci_get_device+0x18/0x20
> [<ffffffff8139ccfb>] pci_get_domain_bus_and_slot+0x2b/0x60
> [<ffffffff813b09e7>] pci_iov_remove_virtfn+0x57/0x180
> [<ffffffff813b0b95>] pci_disable_sriov+0x65/0x140
> [<ffffffffa00a1af7>] ixgbe_disable_sriov+0xc7/0x1d0 [ixgbe]
> [<ffffffffa00a1e9d>] ixgbe_pci_sriov_configure+0x3d/0x170 [ixgbe]
> [<ffffffff8139d28c>] sriov_numvfs_store+0xdc/0x130
> ...
> RIP [<ffffffff813b1647>] pci_iov_release+0x57/0x60
>
> Use the existing mutex lock to protect each enable/disable operation.
>
> -v2: move the existing lock from protecting the config of the IOV bus
> to protecting the writes to sriov_numvfs in sysfs without maintaining
> a "locked" version of pci_iov_add/remove_virtfn().
> As suggested by Gavin Shan <gwshan@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>
> CC: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Emil Tantilov <emil.s.tantilov@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/pci/iov.c | 7 -------
> drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c | 23 ++++++++++++++++-------
> drivers/pci/pci.h | 2 +-
> 3 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/iov.c b/drivers/pci/iov.c
> index 4722782..2479ae8 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/iov.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/iov.c
> @@ -124,7 +124,6 @@ int pci_iov_add_virtfn(struct pci_dev *dev, int id, int reset)
> struct pci_sriov *iov = dev->sriov;
> struct pci_bus *bus;
>
> - mutex_lock(&iov->dev->sriov->lock);
> bus = virtfn_add_bus(dev->bus, pci_iov_virtfn_bus(dev, id));
> if (!bus)
> goto failed;
> @@ -162,7 +161,6 @@ int pci_iov_add_virtfn(struct pci_dev *dev, int id, int reset)
> __pci_reset_function(virtfn);
>
> pci_device_add(virtfn, virtfn->bus);
> - mutex_unlock(&iov->dev->sriov->lock);
>
> pci_bus_add_device(virtfn);
> sprintf(buf, "virtfn%u", id);
> @@ -181,12 +179,10 @@ int pci_iov_add_virtfn(struct pci_dev *dev, int id, int reset)
> sysfs_remove_link(&dev->dev.kobj, buf);
> failed1:
> pci_dev_put(dev);
> - mutex_lock(&iov->dev->sriov->lock);
> pci_stop_and_remove_bus_device(virtfn);
> failed0:
> virtfn_remove_bus(dev->bus, bus);
> failed:
> - mutex_unlock(&iov->dev->sriov->lock);
>
> return rc;
> }
> @@ -195,7 +191,6 @@ void pci_iov_remove_virtfn(struct pci_dev *dev, int id, int reset)
> {
> char buf[VIRTFN_ID_LEN];
> struct pci_dev *virtfn;
> - struct pci_sriov *iov = dev->sriov;
>
> virtfn = pci_get_domain_bus_and_slot(pci_domain_nr(dev->bus),
> pci_iov_virtfn_bus(dev, id),
> @@ -218,10 +213,8 @@ void pci_iov_remove_virtfn(struct pci_dev *dev, int id, int reset)
> if (virtfn->dev.kobj.sd)
> sysfs_remove_link(&virtfn->dev.kobj, "physfn");
>
> - mutex_lock(&iov->dev->sriov->lock);
> pci_stop_and_remove_bus_device(virtfn);
> virtfn_remove_bus(dev->bus, virtfn->bus);
> - mutex_unlock(&iov->dev->sriov->lock);
>
> /* balance pci_get_domain_bus_and_slot() */
> pci_dev_put(virtfn);
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c b/drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c
> index 0666287..25d010d 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c
> @@ -472,6 +472,7 @@ static ssize_t sriov_numvfs_store(struct device *dev,
> const char *buf, size_t count)
> {
> struct pci_dev *pdev = to_pci_dev(dev);
> + struct pci_sriov *iov = pdev->sriov;
> int ret;
> u16 num_vfs;
>
> @@ -482,38 +483,46 @@ static ssize_t sriov_numvfs_store(struct device *dev,
> if (num_vfs > pci_sriov_get_totalvfs(pdev))
> return -ERANGE;
>
> + mutex_lock(&iov->dev->sriov->lock);
> +
> if (num_vfs == pdev->sriov->num_VFs)
> - return count; /* no change */
> + goto exit;
>
> /* is PF driver loaded w/callback */
> if (!pdev->driver || !pdev->driver->sriov_configure) {
> dev_info(&pdev->dev, "Driver doesn't support SRIOV configuration via sysfs\n");
> - return -ENOSYS;
> + ret = -ENOENT;
> + goto exit;
Hi Emil,
Generally the patch looks fine to me - but I am wondering why the change
from -ENOSYS TO -ENOENT?
Thanks,
- Greg
> }
>
> if (num_vfs == 0) {
> /* disable VFs */
> ret = pdev->driver->sriov_configure(pdev, 0);
> - if (ret < 0)
> - return ret;
> - return count;
> + goto exit;
> }
>
> /* enable VFs */
> if (pdev->sriov->num_VFs) {
> dev_warn(&pdev->dev, "%d VFs already enabled. Disable before enabling %d VFs\n",
> pdev->sriov->num_VFs, num_vfs);
> - return -EBUSY;
> + ret = -EBUSY;
> + goto exit;
> }
>
> ret = pdev->driver->sriov_configure(pdev, num_vfs);
> if (ret < 0)
> - return ret;
> + goto exit;
>
> if (ret != num_vfs)
> dev_warn(&pdev->dev, "%d VFs requested; only %d enabled\n",
> num_vfs, ret);
>
> +exit:
> + mutex_unlock(&iov->dev->sriov->lock);
> +
> + if (ret < 0)
> + return ret;
> +
> return count;
> }
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/pci.h b/drivers/pci/pci.h
> index cb17db2..8dd38e6 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/pci.h
> +++ b/drivers/pci/pci.h
> @@ -270,7 +270,7 @@ struct pci_sriov {
> u16 driver_max_VFs; /* max num VFs driver supports */
> struct pci_dev *dev; /* lowest numbered PF */
> struct pci_dev *self; /* this PF */
> - struct mutex lock; /* lock for VF bus */
> + struct mutex lock; /* lock for setting sriov_numvfs in sysfs */
> resource_size_t barsz[PCI_SRIOV_NUM_BARS]; /* VF BAR size */
> };
>
>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Greg <gvrose8192@gmail.com>
To: Emil Tantilov <emil.s.tantilov@intel.com>
Cc: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org,
alexander.h.duyck@intel.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] PCI: lock each enable/disable num_vfs operation in sysfs
Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2017 15:17:42 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1483744662.3868.1.camel@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170106215908.20736.34632.stgit@localhost6.localdomain6>
On Fri, 2017-01-06 at 13:59 -0800, Emil Tantilov wrote:
> Enabling/disabling SRIOV via sysfs by echo-ing multiple values
> simultaneously:
>
> echo 63 > /sys/class/net/ethX/device/sriov_numvfs&
> echo 63 > /sys/class/net/ethX/device/sriov_numvfs
>
> sleep 5
>
> echo 0 > /sys/class/net/ethX/device/sriov_numvfs&
> echo 0 > /sys/class/net/ethX/device/sriov_numvfs
>
> Results in the following bug:
>
> kernel BUG at drivers/pci/iov.c:495!
> invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP
> CPU: 1 PID: 8050 Comm: bash Tainted: G W 4.9.0-rc7-net-next #2092
> RIP: 0010:[<ffffffff813b1647>]
> [<ffffffff813b1647>] pci_iov_release+0x57/0x60
>
> Call Trace:
> [<ffffffff81391726>] pci_release_dev+0x26/0x70
> [<ffffffff8155be6e>] device_release+0x3e/0xb0
> [<ffffffff81365ee7>] kobject_cleanup+0x67/0x180
> [<ffffffff81365d9d>] kobject_put+0x2d/0x60
> [<ffffffff8155bc27>] put_device+0x17/0x20
> [<ffffffff8139c08a>] pci_dev_put+0x1a/0x20
> [<ffffffff8139cb6b>] pci_get_dev_by_id+0x5b/0x90
> [<ffffffff8139cca5>] pci_get_subsys+0x35/0x40
> [<ffffffff8139ccc8>] pci_get_device+0x18/0x20
> [<ffffffff8139ccfb>] pci_get_domain_bus_and_slot+0x2b/0x60
> [<ffffffff813b09e7>] pci_iov_remove_virtfn+0x57/0x180
> [<ffffffff813b0b95>] pci_disable_sriov+0x65/0x140
> [<ffffffffa00a1af7>] ixgbe_disable_sriov+0xc7/0x1d0 [ixgbe]
> [<ffffffffa00a1e9d>] ixgbe_pci_sriov_configure+0x3d/0x170 [ixgbe]
> [<ffffffff8139d28c>] sriov_numvfs_store+0xdc/0x130
> ...
> RIP [<ffffffff813b1647>] pci_iov_release+0x57/0x60
>
> Use the existing mutex lock to protect each enable/disable operation.
>
> -v2: move the existing lock from protecting the config of the IOV bus
> to protecting the writes to sriov_numvfs in sysfs without maintaining
> a "locked" version of pci_iov_add/remove_virtfn().
> As suggested by Gavin Shan <gwshan@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>
> CC: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Emil Tantilov <emil.s.tantilov@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/pci/iov.c | 7 -------
> drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c | 23 ++++++++++++++++-------
> drivers/pci/pci.h | 2 +-
> 3 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/iov.c b/drivers/pci/iov.c
> index 4722782..2479ae8 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/iov.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/iov.c
> @@ -124,7 +124,6 @@ int pci_iov_add_virtfn(struct pci_dev *dev, int id, int reset)
> struct pci_sriov *iov = dev->sriov;
> struct pci_bus *bus;
>
> - mutex_lock(&iov->dev->sriov->lock);
> bus = virtfn_add_bus(dev->bus, pci_iov_virtfn_bus(dev, id));
> if (!bus)
> goto failed;
> @@ -162,7 +161,6 @@ int pci_iov_add_virtfn(struct pci_dev *dev, int id, int reset)
> __pci_reset_function(virtfn);
>
> pci_device_add(virtfn, virtfn->bus);
> - mutex_unlock(&iov->dev->sriov->lock);
>
> pci_bus_add_device(virtfn);
> sprintf(buf, "virtfn%u", id);
> @@ -181,12 +179,10 @@ int pci_iov_add_virtfn(struct pci_dev *dev, int id, int reset)
> sysfs_remove_link(&dev->dev.kobj, buf);
> failed1:
> pci_dev_put(dev);
> - mutex_lock(&iov->dev->sriov->lock);
> pci_stop_and_remove_bus_device(virtfn);
> failed0:
> virtfn_remove_bus(dev->bus, bus);
> failed:
> - mutex_unlock(&iov->dev->sriov->lock);
>
> return rc;
> }
> @@ -195,7 +191,6 @@ void pci_iov_remove_virtfn(struct pci_dev *dev, int id, int reset)
> {
> char buf[VIRTFN_ID_LEN];
> struct pci_dev *virtfn;
> - struct pci_sriov *iov = dev->sriov;
>
> virtfn = pci_get_domain_bus_and_slot(pci_domain_nr(dev->bus),
> pci_iov_virtfn_bus(dev, id),
> @@ -218,10 +213,8 @@ void pci_iov_remove_virtfn(struct pci_dev *dev, int id, int reset)
> if (virtfn->dev.kobj.sd)
> sysfs_remove_link(&virtfn->dev.kobj, "physfn");
>
> - mutex_lock(&iov->dev->sriov->lock);
> pci_stop_and_remove_bus_device(virtfn);
> virtfn_remove_bus(dev->bus, virtfn->bus);
> - mutex_unlock(&iov->dev->sriov->lock);
>
> /* balance pci_get_domain_bus_and_slot() */
> pci_dev_put(virtfn);
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c b/drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c
> index 0666287..25d010d 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c
> @@ -472,6 +472,7 @@ static ssize_t sriov_numvfs_store(struct device *dev,
> const char *buf, size_t count)
> {
> struct pci_dev *pdev = to_pci_dev(dev);
> + struct pci_sriov *iov = pdev->sriov;
> int ret;
> u16 num_vfs;
>
> @@ -482,38 +483,46 @@ static ssize_t sriov_numvfs_store(struct device *dev,
> if (num_vfs > pci_sriov_get_totalvfs(pdev))
> return -ERANGE;
>
> + mutex_lock(&iov->dev->sriov->lock);
> +
> if (num_vfs == pdev->sriov->num_VFs)
> - return count; /* no change */
> + goto exit;
>
> /* is PF driver loaded w/callback */
> if (!pdev->driver || !pdev->driver->sriov_configure) {
> dev_info(&pdev->dev, "Driver doesn't support SRIOV configuration via sysfs\n");
> - return -ENOSYS;
> + ret = -ENOENT;
> + goto exit;
Hi Emil,
Generally the patch looks fine to me - but I am wondering why the change
from -ENOSYS TO -ENOENT?
Thanks,
- Greg
> }
>
> if (num_vfs == 0) {
> /* disable VFs */
> ret = pdev->driver->sriov_configure(pdev, 0);
> - if (ret < 0)
> - return ret;
> - return count;
> + goto exit;
> }
>
> /* enable VFs */
> if (pdev->sriov->num_VFs) {
> dev_warn(&pdev->dev, "%d VFs already enabled. Disable before enabling %d VFs\n",
> pdev->sriov->num_VFs, num_vfs);
> - return -EBUSY;
> + ret = -EBUSY;
> + goto exit;
> }
>
> ret = pdev->driver->sriov_configure(pdev, num_vfs);
> if (ret < 0)
> - return ret;
> + goto exit;
>
> if (ret != num_vfs)
> dev_warn(&pdev->dev, "%d VFs requested; only %d enabled\n",
> num_vfs, ret);
>
> +exit:
> + mutex_unlock(&iov->dev->sriov->lock);
> +
> + if (ret < 0)
> + return ret;
> +
> return count;
> }
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/pci.h b/drivers/pci/pci.h
> index cb17db2..8dd38e6 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/pci.h
> +++ b/drivers/pci/pci.h
> @@ -270,7 +270,7 @@ struct pci_sriov {
> u16 driver_max_VFs; /* max num VFs driver supports */
> struct pci_dev *dev; /* lowest numbered PF */
> struct pci_dev *self; /* this PF */
> - struct mutex lock; /* lock for VF bus */
> + struct mutex lock; /* lock for setting sriov_numvfs in sysfs */
> resource_size_t barsz[PCI_SRIOV_NUM_BARS]; /* VF BAR size */
> };
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-01-06 23:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-01-06 21:59 [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH v2] PCI: lock each enable/disable num_vfs operation in sysfs Emil Tantilov
2017-01-06 21:59 ` Emil Tantilov
2017-01-06 23:17 ` Greg [this message]
2017-01-06 23:17 ` Greg
2017-01-06 23:28 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Tantilov, Emil S
2017-01-06 23:28 ` Tantilov, Emil S
2017-01-06 23:35 ` Greg
2017-01-06 23:35 ` Greg
2017-01-08 23:45 ` Gavin Shan
2017-01-08 23:45 ` Gavin Shan
2017-02-03 19:45 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Bjorn Helgaas
2017-02-03 19:45 ` Bjorn Helgaas
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1483744662.3868.1.camel@gmail.com \
--to=gvrose8192@gmail.com \
--cc=intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.