* [PATCH] dma-fence: add comment for WARN_ON in dma_fence_release()
@ 2018-01-29 15:40 Oded Gabbay
2018-01-30 10:33 ` Daniel Vetter
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Oded Gabbay @ 2018-01-29 15:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: maarten.lankhorst, daniel.vetter, dri-devel, robdclark
In dma_fence_release() there is a WARN_ON which could be triggered by
several cases of wrong dma-fence usage. This patch adds a comment to
explain two use-cases to help driver developers that use dma-fence
and trigger that WARN_ON to better understand the reasons for it.
Signed-off-by: Oded Gabbay <oded.gabbay@gmail.com>
---
drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 33 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c
index 5d101c4053e0..a7170ab23ec0 100644
--- a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c
+++ b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c
@@ -171,6 +171,39 @@ void dma_fence_release(struct kref *kref)
trace_dma_fence_destroy(fence);
+ /*
+ * If the WARN_ON below is triggered it could be because the dma fence
+ * was not signaled and therefore, the cb list is still not empty
+ * because the cb functions were not called.
+ *
+ * A more subtle case is where the fence got signaled by a thread that
+ * didn't hold a ref to the fence. The following describes the scenario:
+ *
+ * Thread A Thread B
+ *-------------------------- --------------------------
+ * calls dma_fence_signal() {
+ * set signal bit
+ *
+ * scheduled out
+ * ---------------------------> calls dma_fence_wait_timeout() and
+ * returns immediately
+ *
+ * calls dma_fence_put()
+ * |
+ * |thread A doesn't hold ref
+ * |to fence so ref goes to 0
+ * |and release is called
+ * |
+ * -> dma_fence_release()
+ * |
+ * -> WARN_ON triggered
+ *
+ * go over CB list,
+ * call each CB and remove it
+ * }
+ *
+ *
+ */
WARN_ON(!list_empty(&fence->cb_list));
if (fence->ops->release)
--
2.14.3
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] dma-fence: add comment for WARN_ON in dma_fence_release()
2018-01-29 15:40 [PATCH] dma-fence: add comment for WARN_ON in dma_fence_release() Oded Gabbay
@ 2018-01-30 10:33 ` Daniel Vetter
2018-01-31 9:03 ` Oded Gabbay
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Vetter @ 2018-01-30 10:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Oded Gabbay; +Cc: maarten.lankhorst, daniel.vetter, dri-devel
On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 05:40:02PM +0200, Oded Gabbay wrote:
> In dma_fence_release() there is a WARN_ON which could be triggered by
> several cases of wrong dma-fence usage. This patch adds a comment to
> explain two use-cases to help driver developers that use dma-fence
> and trigger that WARN_ON to better understand the reasons for it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Oded Gabbay <oded.gabbay@gmail.com>
Not sure how useful this is, trying to do anything with a dma_fence while
not holding a reference is just plain buggy. If you do that, then all
kinds of use-after-free hilarity can happen. Trying to enumerate all the
ways you can get refcounting wrong seems futile.
What we maybe could do is a simple one-line like
/* Failed to signal before release, could be a refcounting issue. */
I think this is generally a true statement and more useful hint for the
next convoluted scenario (which in all likelihood will be different from
yours).
-Daniel
> ---
> drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 33 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c
> index 5d101c4053e0..a7170ab23ec0 100644
> --- a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c
> +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c
> @@ -171,6 +171,39 @@ void dma_fence_release(struct kref *kref)
>
> trace_dma_fence_destroy(fence);
>
> + /*
> + * If the WARN_ON below is triggered it could be because the dma fence
> + * was not signaled and therefore, the cb list is still not empty
> + * because the cb functions were not called.
> + *
> + * A more subtle case is where the fence got signaled by a thread that
> + * didn't hold a ref to the fence. The following describes the scenario:
> + *
> + * Thread A Thread B
> + *-------------------------- --------------------------
> + * calls dma_fence_signal() {
> + * set signal bit
> + *
> + * scheduled out
> + * ---------------------------> calls dma_fence_wait_timeout() and
> + * returns immediately
> + *
> + * calls dma_fence_put()
> + * |
> + * |thread A doesn't hold ref
> + * |to fence so ref goes to 0
> + * |and release is called
> + * |
> + * -> dma_fence_release()
> + * |
> + * -> WARN_ON triggered
> + *
> + * go over CB list,
> + * call each CB and remove it
> + * }
> + *
> + *
> + */
> WARN_ON(!list_empty(&fence->cb_list));
>
> if (fence->ops->release)
> --
> 2.14.3
>
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] dma-fence: add comment for WARN_ON in dma_fence_release()
2018-01-30 10:33 ` Daniel Vetter
@ 2018-01-31 9:03 ` Oded Gabbay
2018-01-31 10:18 ` Daniel Vetter
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Oded Gabbay @ 2018-01-31 9:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Daniel Vetter; +Cc: Maling list - DRI developers
On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 12:33 PM, Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 05:40:02PM +0200, Oded Gabbay wrote:
>> In dma_fence_release() there is a WARN_ON which could be triggered by
>> several cases of wrong dma-fence usage. This patch adds a comment to
>> explain two use-cases to help driver developers that use dma-fence
>> and trigger that WARN_ON to better understand the reasons for it.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Oded Gabbay <oded.gabbay@gmail.com>
>
> Not sure how useful this is, trying to do anything with a dma_fence while
> not holding a reference is just plain buggy. If you do that, then all
> kinds of use-after-free hilarity can happen. Trying to enumerate all the
> ways you can get refcounting wrong seems futile.
>
> What we maybe could do is a simple one-line like
>
> /* Failed to signal before release, could be a refcounting issue. */
>
> I think this is generally a true statement and more useful hint for the
> next convoluted scenario (which in all likelihood will be different from
> yours).
> -Daniel
>
>> ---
>> drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 33 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c
>> index 5d101c4053e0..a7170ab23ec0 100644
>> --- a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c
>> +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c
>> @@ -171,6 +171,39 @@ void dma_fence_release(struct kref *kref)
>>
>> trace_dma_fence_destroy(fence);
>>
>> + /*
>> + * If the WARN_ON below is triggered it could be because the dma fence
>> + * was not signaled and therefore, the cb list is still not empty
>> + * because the cb functions were not called.
>> + *
>> + * A more subtle case is where the fence got signaled by a thread that
>> + * didn't hold a ref to the fence. The following describes the scenario:
>> + *
>> + * Thread A Thread B
>> + *-------------------------- --------------------------
>> + * calls dma_fence_signal() {
>> + * set signal bit
>> + *
>> + * scheduled out
>> + * ---------------------------> calls dma_fence_wait_timeout() and
>> + * returns immediately
>> + *
>> + * calls dma_fence_put()
>> + * |
>> + * |thread A doesn't hold ref
>> + * |to fence so ref goes to 0
>> + * |and release is called
>> + * |
>> + * -> dma_fence_release()
>> + * |
>> + * -> WARN_ON triggered
>> + *
>> + * go over CB list,
>> + * call each CB and remove it
>> + * }
>> + *
>> + *
>> + */
>> WARN_ON(!list_empty(&fence->cb_list));
>>
>> if (fence->ops->release)
>> --
>> 2.14.3
>>
>
> --
> Daniel Vetter
> Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
> http://blog.ffwll.ch
Hi Daniel,
Yeah, I get what you are saying.
Can I add your RB to the one-liner version ?
Thanks,
Oded
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] dma-fence: add comment for WARN_ON in dma_fence_release()
2018-01-31 9:03 ` Oded Gabbay
@ 2018-01-31 10:18 ` Daniel Vetter
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Vetter @ 2018-01-31 10:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Oded Gabbay; +Cc: Maling list - DRI developers
On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 11:03:39AM +0200, Oded Gabbay wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 12:33 PM, Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 05:40:02PM +0200, Oded Gabbay wrote:
> >> In dma_fence_release() there is a WARN_ON which could be triggered by
> >> several cases of wrong dma-fence usage. This patch adds a comment to
> >> explain two use-cases to help driver developers that use dma-fence
> >> and trigger that WARN_ON to better understand the reasons for it.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Oded Gabbay <oded.gabbay@gmail.com>
> >
> > Not sure how useful this is, trying to do anything with a dma_fence while
> > not holding a reference is just plain buggy. If you do that, then all
> > kinds of use-after-free hilarity can happen. Trying to enumerate all the
> > ways you can get refcounting wrong seems futile.
> >
> > What we maybe could do is a simple one-line like
> >
> > /* Failed to signal before release, could be a refcounting issue. */
> >
> > I think this is generally a true statement and more useful hint for the
> > next convoluted scenario (which in all likelihood will be different from
> > yours).
> > -Daniel
> >
> >> ---
> >> drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >> 1 file changed, 33 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c
> >> index 5d101c4053e0..a7170ab23ec0 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c
> >> @@ -171,6 +171,39 @@ void dma_fence_release(struct kref *kref)
> >>
> >> trace_dma_fence_destroy(fence);
> >>
> >> + /*
> >> + * If the WARN_ON below is triggered it could be because the dma fence
> >> + * was not signaled and therefore, the cb list is still not empty
> >> + * because the cb functions were not called.
> >> + *
> >> + * A more subtle case is where the fence got signaled by a thread that
> >> + * didn't hold a ref to the fence. The following describes the scenario:
> >> + *
> >> + * Thread A Thread B
> >> + *-------------------------- --------------------------
> >> + * calls dma_fence_signal() {
> >> + * set signal bit
> >> + *
> >> + * scheduled out
> >> + * ---------------------------> calls dma_fence_wait_timeout() and
> >> + * returns immediately
> >> + *
> >> + * calls dma_fence_put()
> >> + * |
> >> + * |thread A doesn't hold ref
> >> + * |to fence so ref goes to 0
> >> + * |and release is called
> >> + * |
> >> + * -> dma_fence_release()
> >> + * |
> >> + * -> WARN_ON triggered
> >> + *
> >> + * go over CB list,
> >> + * call each CB and remove it
> >> + * }
> >> + *
> >> + *
> >> + */
> >> WARN_ON(!list_empty(&fence->cb_list));
> >>
> >> if (fence->ops->release)
> >> --
> >> 2.14.3
> >>
> >
> > --
> > Daniel Vetter
> > Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
> > http://blog.ffwll.ch
>
> Hi Daniel,
> Yeah, I get what you are saying.
> Can I add your RB to the one-liner version ?
Sure.
Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
Cheers, Daniel
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2018-01-31 10:19 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2018-01-29 15:40 [PATCH] dma-fence: add comment for WARN_ON in dma_fence_release() Oded Gabbay
2018-01-30 10:33 ` Daniel Vetter
2018-01-31 9:03 ` Oded Gabbay
2018-01-31 10:18 ` Daniel Vetter
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.