From: Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@linux.ibm.com>
To: "Liu, Yi L" <yi.l.liu@intel.com>,
"alex.williamson@redhat.com" <alex.williamson@redhat.com>,
"pbonzini@redhat.com" <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: "akrowiak@linux.ibm.com" <akrowiak@linux.ibm.com>,
"jjherne@linux.ibm.com" <jjherne@linux.ibm.com>,
"imbrenda@linux.ibm.com" <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>,
"frankja@linux.ibm.com" <frankja@linux.ibm.com>,
"pmorel@linux.ibm.com" <pmorel@linux.ibm.com>,
"david@redhat.com" <david@redhat.com>, "Christopherson, ,
Sean" <seanjc@google.com>,
"intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org"
<intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
"cohuck@redhat.com" <cohuck@redhat.com>,
"farman@linux.ibm.com" <farman@linux.ibm.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"pasic@linux.ibm.com" <pasic@linux.ibm.com>,
"jgg@nvidia.com" <jgg@nvidia.com>,
"kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-s390@vger.kernel.org" <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>,
"borntraeger@linux.ibm.com" <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>,
"intel-gvt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org"
<intel-gvt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] kvm/vfio: Fix potential deadlock on vfio group_lock
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2023 10:45:40 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6eff63d8-d825-aecd-12b5-e8dbf55f4372@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <DS0PR11MB7529B08476DF1764F1B6C007C3C59@DS0PR11MB7529.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
On 1/20/23 10:08 AM, Liu, Yi L wrote:
>> From: Liu, Yi L <yi.l.liu@intel.com>
>> Sent: Friday, January 20, 2023 11:05 PM
>>
>> Currently it is possible that the final put of a KVM reference comes from
>> vfio during its device close operation. This occurs while the vfio group
>> lock is held; however, if the vfio device is still in the kvm device list,
>> then the following call chain could result in a deadlock:
>>
>> VFIO holds group->group_lock/group_rwsem
>> -> kvm_put_kvm
>> -> kvm_destroy_vm
>> -> kvm_destroy_devices
>> -> kvm_vfio_destroy
>> -> kvm_vfio_file_set_kvm
>> -> vfio_file_set_kvm
>> -> try to hold group->group_lock/group_rwsem
>>
>> The key function is the kvm_destroy_devices() which triggers destroy cb
>> of kvm_device_ops. It calls back to vfio and try to hold group_lock. So
>> if this path doesn't call back to vfio, this dead lock would be fixed.
>> Actually, there is a way for it. KVM provides another point to free the
>> kvm-vfio device which is the point when the device file descriptor is
>> closed. This can be achieved by providing the release cb instead of the
>> destroy cb. Also rename kvm_vfio_destroy() to be kvm_vfio_release().
>>
>> /*
>> * Destroy is responsible for freeing dev.
>> *
>> * Destroy may be called before or after destructors are called
>> * on emulated I/O regions, depending on whether a reference is
>> * held by a vcpu or other kvm component that gets destroyed
>> * after the emulated I/O.
>> */
>> void (*destroy)(struct kvm_device *dev);
>>
>> /*
>> * Release is an alternative method to free the device. It is
>> * called when the device file descriptor is closed. Once
>> * release is called, the destroy method will not be called
>> * anymore as the device is removed from the device list of
>> * the VM. kvm->lock is held.
>> */
>> void (*release)(struct kvm_device *dev);
>>
>> Fixes: 421cfe6596f6 ("vfio: remove VFIO_GROUP_NOTIFY_SET_KVM")
>> Reported-by: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>
>> Suggested-by: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Yi Liu <yi.l.liu@intel.com>
>
> More background can be found in Mathew's work.
> https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/20230114000351.115444-1-mjrosato@linux.ibm.com/T/#u
>
Thanks Yi.
Reviewed-by: Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@linux.ibm.com>
One small nit: There is a comment at the very end of kvm_vfio_release on the kfree(dev) that still references .destroy, this should be updated to .release
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@linux.ibm.com>
To: "Liu, Yi L" <yi.l.liu@intel.com>,
"alex.williamson@redhat.com" <alex.williamson@redhat.com>,
"pbonzini@redhat.com" <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: "jgg@nvidia.com" <jgg@nvidia.com>,
"Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@intel.com>,
"cohuck@redhat.com" <cohuck@redhat.com>,
"farman@linux.ibm.com" <farman@linux.ibm.com>,
"pmorel@linux.ibm.com" <pmorel@linux.ibm.com>,
"borntraeger@linux.ibm.com" <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>,
"frankja@linux.ibm.com" <frankja@linux.ibm.com>,
"imbrenda@linux.ibm.com" <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>,
"david@redhat.com" <david@redhat.com>,
"akrowiak@linux.ibm.com" <akrowiak@linux.ibm.com>,
"jjherne@linux.ibm.com" <jjherne@linux.ibm.com>,
"pasic@linux.ibm.com" <pasic@linux.ibm.com>,
"zhenyuw@linux.intel.com" <zhenyuw@linux.intel.com>,
"Wang, Zhi A" <zhi.a.wang@intel.com>, "Christopherson, ,
Sean" <seanjc@google.com>,
"linux-s390@vger.kernel.org" <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>,
"kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
"intel-gvt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org"
<intel-gvt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org>,
"intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org"
<intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kvm/vfio: Fix potential deadlock on vfio group_lock
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2023 10:45:40 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6eff63d8-d825-aecd-12b5-e8dbf55f4372@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <DS0PR11MB7529B08476DF1764F1B6C007C3C59@DS0PR11MB7529.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
On 1/20/23 10:08 AM, Liu, Yi L wrote:
>> From: Liu, Yi L <yi.l.liu@intel.com>
>> Sent: Friday, January 20, 2023 11:05 PM
>>
>> Currently it is possible that the final put of a KVM reference comes from
>> vfio during its device close operation. This occurs while the vfio group
>> lock is held; however, if the vfio device is still in the kvm device list,
>> then the following call chain could result in a deadlock:
>>
>> VFIO holds group->group_lock/group_rwsem
>> -> kvm_put_kvm
>> -> kvm_destroy_vm
>> -> kvm_destroy_devices
>> -> kvm_vfio_destroy
>> -> kvm_vfio_file_set_kvm
>> -> vfio_file_set_kvm
>> -> try to hold group->group_lock/group_rwsem
>>
>> The key function is the kvm_destroy_devices() which triggers destroy cb
>> of kvm_device_ops. It calls back to vfio and try to hold group_lock. So
>> if this path doesn't call back to vfio, this dead lock would be fixed.
>> Actually, there is a way for it. KVM provides another point to free the
>> kvm-vfio device which is the point when the device file descriptor is
>> closed. This can be achieved by providing the release cb instead of the
>> destroy cb. Also rename kvm_vfio_destroy() to be kvm_vfio_release().
>>
>> /*
>> * Destroy is responsible for freeing dev.
>> *
>> * Destroy may be called before or after destructors are called
>> * on emulated I/O regions, depending on whether a reference is
>> * held by a vcpu or other kvm component that gets destroyed
>> * after the emulated I/O.
>> */
>> void (*destroy)(struct kvm_device *dev);
>>
>> /*
>> * Release is an alternative method to free the device. It is
>> * called when the device file descriptor is closed. Once
>> * release is called, the destroy method will not be called
>> * anymore as the device is removed from the device list of
>> * the VM. kvm->lock is held.
>> */
>> void (*release)(struct kvm_device *dev);
>>
>> Fixes: 421cfe6596f6 ("vfio: remove VFIO_GROUP_NOTIFY_SET_KVM")
>> Reported-by: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>
>> Suggested-by: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Yi Liu <yi.l.liu@intel.com>
>
> More background can be found in Mathew's work.
> https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/20230114000351.115444-1-mjrosato@linux.ibm.com/T/#u
>
Thanks Yi.
Reviewed-by: Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@linux.ibm.com>
One small nit: There is a comment at the very end of kvm_vfio_release on the kfree(dev) that still references .destroy, this should be updated to .release
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-01-20 15:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-01-20 15:05 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] kvm/vfio: Fix potential deadlock on vfio group_lock Yi Liu
2023-01-20 15:05 ` Yi Liu
2023-01-20 15:08 ` [Intel-gfx] " Liu, Yi L
2023-01-20 15:08 ` Liu, Yi L
2023-01-20 15:45 ` Matthew Rosato [this message]
2023-01-20 15:45 ` Matthew Rosato
2023-01-20 15:49 ` [Intel-gfx] " Alex Williamson
2023-01-20 15:49 ` Alex Williamson
2023-01-20 17:58 ` [Intel-gfx] " Alex Williamson
2023-01-20 17:58 ` Alex Williamson
2023-01-20 19:25 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for " Patchwork
2023-01-21 20:16 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.IGT: " Patchwork
2023-01-31 14:27 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] " Anthony Krowiak
2023-01-31 14:27 ` Anthony Krowiak
2023-01-31 14:34 ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Gunthorpe
2023-01-31 14:34 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-01-31 14:46 ` [Intel-gfx] " Anthony Krowiak
2023-01-31 14:46 ` Anthony Krowiak
2023-01-31 14:48 ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Gunthorpe
2023-01-31 14:48 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-01-31 15:00 ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Rosato
2023-01-31 15:00 ` Matthew Rosato
2023-01-31 15:12 ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Gunthorpe
2023-01-31 15:12 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-01-31 14:35 ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Rosato
2023-01-31 14:35 ` Matthew Rosato
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=6eff63d8-d825-aecd-12b5-e8dbf55f4372@linux.ibm.com \
--to=mjrosato@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=akrowiak@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
--cc=borntraeger@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=cohuck@redhat.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=farman@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=frankja@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=imbrenda@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=intel-gvt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=jjherne@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pasic@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=pmorel@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=yi.l.liu@intel.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.