From: Saeed Mahameed <saeed@kernel.org>
To: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Cc: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@nvidia.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, Tariq Toukan <tariqt@nvidia.com>,
Moshe Shemesh <moshe@nvidia.com>
Subject: [net 11/15] net/mlx5e: Fix possible deadlock on mlx5e_tx_timeout_work
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 17:48:00 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231122014804.27716-12-saeed@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231122014804.27716-1-saeed@kernel.org>
From: Moshe Shemesh <moshe@nvidia.com>
Due to the cited patch, devlink health commands take devlink lock and
this may result in deadlock for mlx5e_tx_reporter as it takes local
state_lock before calling devlink health report and on the other hand
devlink health commands such as diagnose for same reporter take local
state_lock after taking devlink lock (see kernel log below).
To fix it, remove local state_lock from mlx5e_tx_timeout_work() before
calling devlink_health_report() and take care to cancel the work before
any call to close channels, which may free the SQs that should be
handled by the work. Before cancel_work_sync(), use current_work() to
check we are not calling it from within the work, as
mlx5e_tx_timeout_work() itself may close the channels and reopen as part
of recovery flow.
While removing state_lock from mlx5e_tx_timeout_work() keep rtnl_lock to
ensure no change in netdev->real_num_tx_queues, but use rtnl_trylock()
and a flag to avoid deadlock by calling cancel_work_sync() before
closing the channels while holding rtnl_lock too.
Kernel log:
======================================================
WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
6.0.0-rc3_for_upstream_debug_2022_08_30_13_10 #1 Not tainted
------------------------------------------------------
kworker/u16:2/65 is trying to acquire lock:
ffff888122f6c2f8 (&devlink->lock_key#2){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: devlink_health_report+0x2f1/0x7e0
but task is already holding lock:
ffff888121d20be0 (&priv->state_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: mlx5e_tx_timeout_work+0x70/0x280 [mlx5_core]
which lock already depends on the new lock.
the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
-> #1 (&priv->state_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}:
__mutex_lock+0x12c/0x14b0
mlx5e_rx_reporter_diagnose+0x71/0x700 [mlx5_core]
devlink_nl_cmd_health_reporter_diagnose_doit+0x212/0xa50
genl_family_rcv_msg_doit+0x1e9/0x2f0
genl_rcv_msg+0x2e9/0x530
netlink_rcv_skb+0x11d/0x340
genl_rcv+0x24/0x40
netlink_unicast+0x438/0x710
netlink_sendmsg+0x788/0xc40
sock_sendmsg+0xb0/0xe0
__sys_sendto+0x1c1/0x290
__x64_sys_sendto+0xdd/0x1b0
do_syscall_64+0x3d/0x90
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x46/0xb0
-> #0 (&devlink->lock_key#2){+.+.}-{3:3}:
__lock_acquire+0x2c8a/0x6200
lock_acquire+0x1c1/0x550
__mutex_lock+0x12c/0x14b0
devlink_health_report+0x2f1/0x7e0
mlx5e_health_report+0xc9/0xd7 [mlx5_core]
mlx5e_reporter_tx_timeout+0x2ab/0x3d0 [mlx5_core]
mlx5e_tx_timeout_work+0x1c1/0x280 [mlx5_core]
process_one_work+0x7c2/0x1340
worker_thread+0x59d/0xec0
kthread+0x28f/0x330
ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30
other info that might help us debug this:
Possible unsafe locking scenario:
CPU0 CPU1
---- ----
lock(&priv->state_lock);
lock(&devlink->lock_key#2);
lock(&priv->state_lock);
lock(&devlink->lock_key#2);
*** DEADLOCK ***
4 locks held by kworker/u16:2/65:
#0: ffff88811a55b138 ((wq_completion)mlx5e#2){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: process_one_work+0x6e2/0x1340
#1: ffff888101de7db8 ((work_completion)(&priv->tx_timeout_work)){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: process_one_work+0x70f/0x1340
#2: ffffffff84ce8328 (rtnl_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: mlx5e_tx_timeout_work+0x53/0x280 [mlx5_core]
#3: ffff888121d20be0 (&priv->state_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: mlx5e_tx_timeout_work+0x70/0x280 [mlx5_core]
stack backtrace:
CPU: 1 PID: 65 Comm: kworker/u16:2 Not tainted 6.0.0-rc3_for_upstream_debug_2022_08_30_13_10 #1
Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS rel-1.16.0-0-gd239552ce722-prebuilt.qemu.org 04/01/2014
Workqueue: mlx5e mlx5e_tx_timeout_work [mlx5_core]
Call Trace:
<TASK>
dump_stack_lvl+0x57/0x7d
check_noncircular+0x278/0x300
? print_circular_bug+0x460/0x460
? find_held_lock+0x2d/0x110
? __stack_depot_save+0x24c/0x520
? alloc_chain_hlocks+0x228/0x700
__lock_acquire+0x2c8a/0x6200
? register_lock_class+0x1860/0x1860
? kasan_save_stack+0x1e/0x40
? kasan_set_free_info+0x20/0x30
? ____kasan_slab_free+0x11d/0x1b0
? kfree+0x1ba/0x520
? devlink_health_do_dump.part.0+0x171/0x3a0
? devlink_health_report+0x3d5/0x7e0
lock_acquire+0x1c1/0x550
? devlink_health_report+0x2f1/0x7e0
? lockdep_hardirqs_on_prepare+0x400/0x400
? find_held_lock+0x2d/0x110
__mutex_lock+0x12c/0x14b0
? devlink_health_report+0x2f1/0x7e0
? devlink_health_report+0x2f1/0x7e0
? mutex_lock_io_nested+0x1320/0x1320
? trace_hardirqs_on+0x2d/0x100
? bit_wait_io_timeout+0x170/0x170
? devlink_health_do_dump.part.0+0x171/0x3a0
? kfree+0x1ba/0x520
? devlink_health_do_dump.part.0+0x171/0x3a0
devlink_health_report+0x2f1/0x7e0
mlx5e_health_report+0xc9/0xd7 [mlx5_core]
mlx5e_reporter_tx_timeout+0x2ab/0x3d0 [mlx5_core]
? lockdep_hardirqs_on_prepare+0x400/0x400
? mlx5e_reporter_tx_err_cqe+0x1b0/0x1b0 [mlx5_core]
? mlx5e_tx_reporter_timeout_dump+0x70/0x70 [mlx5_core]
? mlx5e_tx_reporter_dump_sq+0x320/0x320 [mlx5_core]
? mlx5e_tx_timeout_work+0x70/0x280 [mlx5_core]
? mutex_lock_io_nested+0x1320/0x1320
? process_one_work+0x70f/0x1340
? lockdep_hardirqs_on_prepare+0x400/0x400
? lock_downgrade+0x6e0/0x6e0
mlx5e_tx_timeout_work+0x1c1/0x280 [mlx5_core]
process_one_work+0x7c2/0x1340
? lockdep_hardirqs_on_prepare+0x400/0x400
? pwq_dec_nr_in_flight+0x230/0x230
? rwlock_bug.part.0+0x90/0x90
worker_thread+0x59d/0xec0
? process_one_work+0x1340/0x1340
kthread+0x28f/0x330
? kthread_complete_and_exit+0x20/0x20
ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30
</TASK>
Fixes: c90005b5f75c ("devlink: Hold the instance lock in health callbacks")
Signed-off-by: Moshe Shemesh <moshe@nvidia.com>
Reviewed-by: Tariq Toukan <tariqt@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@nvidia.com>
---
drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en.h | 1 +
.../net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en_main.c | 27 ++++++++++++++++---
2 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en.h b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en.h
index b2a5da9739d2..729a11b5fb25 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en.h
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en.h
@@ -826,6 +826,7 @@ enum {
MLX5E_STATE_DESTROYING,
MLX5E_STATE_XDP_TX_ENABLED,
MLX5E_STATE_XDP_ACTIVE,
+ MLX5E_STATE_CHANNELS_ACTIVE,
};
struct mlx5e_modify_sq_param {
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en_main.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en_main.c
index ea58c6917433..0c87ddb8a7a2 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en_main.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en_main.c
@@ -2731,6 +2731,7 @@ void mlx5e_close_channels(struct mlx5e_channels *chs)
{
int i;
+ ASSERT_RTNL();
if (chs->ptp) {
mlx5e_ptp_close(chs->ptp);
chs->ptp = NULL;
@@ -3012,17 +3013,29 @@ void mlx5e_activate_priv_channels(struct mlx5e_priv *priv)
if (mlx5e_is_vport_rep(priv))
mlx5e_rep_activate_channels(priv);
+ set_bit(MLX5E_STATE_CHANNELS_ACTIVE, &priv->state);
+
mlx5e_wait_channels_min_rx_wqes(&priv->channels);
if (priv->rx_res)
mlx5e_rx_res_channels_activate(priv->rx_res, &priv->channels);
}
+static void mlx5e_cancel_tx_timeout_work(struct mlx5e_priv *priv)
+{
+ WARN_ON_ONCE(test_bit(MLX5E_STATE_CHANNELS_ACTIVE, &priv->state));
+ if (current_work() != &priv->tx_timeout_work)
+ cancel_work_sync(&priv->tx_timeout_work);
+}
+
void mlx5e_deactivate_priv_channels(struct mlx5e_priv *priv)
{
if (priv->rx_res)
mlx5e_rx_res_channels_deactivate(priv->rx_res);
+ clear_bit(MLX5E_STATE_CHANNELS_ACTIVE, &priv->state);
+ mlx5e_cancel_tx_timeout_work(priv);
+
if (mlx5e_is_vport_rep(priv))
mlx5e_rep_deactivate_channels(priv);
@@ -4801,8 +4814,17 @@ static void mlx5e_tx_timeout_work(struct work_struct *work)
struct net_device *netdev = priv->netdev;
int i;
- rtnl_lock();
- mutex_lock(&priv->state_lock);
+ /* Take rtnl_lock to ensure no change in netdev->real_num_tx_queues
+ * through this flow. However, channel closing flows have to wait for
+ * this work to finish while holding rtnl lock too. So either get the
+ * lock or find that channels are being closed for other reason and
+ * this work is not relevant anymore.
+ */
+ while (!rtnl_trylock()) {
+ if (!test_bit(MLX5E_STATE_CHANNELS_ACTIVE, &priv->state))
+ return;
+ msleep(20);
+ }
if (!test_bit(MLX5E_STATE_OPENED, &priv->state))
goto unlock;
@@ -4821,7 +4843,6 @@ static void mlx5e_tx_timeout_work(struct work_struct *work)
}
unlock:
- mutex_unlock(&priv->state_lock);
rtnl_unlock();
}
--
2.42.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-11-22 1:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-11-22 1:47 [pull request][net 00/15] mlx5 fixes 2023-11-21 Saeed Mahameed
2023-11-22 1:47 ` [net 01/15] net/mlx5e: Honor user choice of IPsec replay window size Saeed Mahameed
2023-11-22 1:47 ` [net 02/15] net/mlx5e: Ensure that IPsec sequence packet number starts from 1 Saeed Mahameed
2023-11-22 1:47 ` [net 03/15] net/mlx5e: Unify esw and normal IPsec status table creation/destruction Saeed Mahameed
2023-11-22 1:47 ` [net 04/15] net/mlx5e: Remove exposure of IPsec RX flow steering struct Saeed Mahameed
2023-11-22 1:47 ` [net 05/15] net/mlx5e: Add IPsec and ASO syndromes check in HW Saeed Mahameed
2023-11-22 1:47 ` [net 06/15] net/mlx5e: Tidy up IPsec NAT-T SA discovery Saeed Mahameed
2023-11-22 1:47 ` [net 07/15] net/mlx5e: Reduce eswitch mode_lock protection context Saeed Mahameed
2023-11-22 1:47 ` [net 08/15] net/mlx5e: Check the number of elements before walk TC rhashtable Saeed Mahameed
2023-11-22 1:47 ` [net 09/15] net/mlx5e: Forbid devlink reload if IPSec rules are offloaded Saeed Mahameed
2023-11-22 9:13 ` Jiri Pirko
2023-11-22 9:35 ` Leon Romanovsky
2023-11-22 9:50 ` Jiri Pirko
2023-11-22 11:28 ` Leon Romanovsky
2023-11-22 12:25 ` Jiri Pirko
2023-11-23 3:53 ` Jakub Kicinski
2023-11-23 6:12 ` Saeed Mahameed
2023-11-23 18:33 ` Leon Romanovsky
2023-11-28 12:02 ` Jiri Pirko
2023-11-28 16:08 ` Leon Romanovsky
2023-11-29 14:51 ` Jiri Pirko
2023-12-04 17:05 ` Leon Romanovsky
2023-12-05 9:30 ` Jiri Pirko
2023-11-22 1:47 ` [net 10/15] net/mlx5e: Disable IPsec offload support if not FW steering Saeed Mahameed
2023-11-22 1:48 ` Saeed Mahameed [this message]
2023-11-22 1:48 ` [net 12/15] net/mlx5e: TC, Don't offload post action rule if not supported Saeed Mahameed
2023-11-22 1:48 ` [net 13/15] net/mlx5: Nack sync reset request when HotPlug is enabled Saeed Mahameed
2023-11-22 1:48 ` [net 14/15] net/mlx5e: Check netdev pointer before checking its net ns Saeed Mahameed
2023-11-22 1:48 ` [net 15/15] net/mlx5: Fix a NULL vs IS_ERR() check Saeed Mahameed
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=20231122014804.27716-12-saeed@kernel.org \
--to=saeed@kernel.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=moshe@nvidia.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=saeedm@nvidia.com \
--cc=tariqt@nvidia.com \
/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.