* Re: context switch within RCU read-side critical section in next-20260518+ with PREEMPT_RT
[not found] ` <4f548d61b2dd12e01f401ce4b8c865f238f7b23c.camel@web.de>
@ 2026-05-21 10:17 ` Thomas Gleixner
2026-05-21 10:21 ` Bert Karwatzki
2026-05-21 12:55 ` [PATCH] amd/amdkfd: Initialize kfd_dev::profiler lock early Thomas Gleixner
0 siblings, 2 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2026-05-21 10:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bert Karwatzki, Mateusz Guzik, Christian Brauner
Cc: linux-kernel, linux-next, linux-rt-devel, linux-fsdevel,
adobriyan, jack, viro, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior, spasswolf,
Alex Deucher, amd-gfx
On Thu, May 21 2026 at 11:20, Bert Karwatzki wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, dem 21.05.2026 um 11:09 +0200 schrieb Mateusz Guzik:
>
> with next-20260519 (no RT, no LOCKDEP) and got no crash so far (4 boots only though (next-20260619
> crashed in 2 out of 3 boots without RT)) but I get this warning on every boot:
>
> [ 2.793416] [ T331] ------------[ cut here ]------------
> [ 2.793433] [ T331] DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(lock->magic != lock)
> [ 2.793434] [ T331] WARNING: kernel/locking/mutex.c:625 at __mutex_lock+0x586/0x10c0, CPU#17: (udev-worker)/331
So either the mutex is corrupted or was never initialized.
> [ 2.793463] [ T331] Modules linked in: amdgpu(+) hid_generic usbhid drm_client_lib i2c_algo_bit drm_buddy hid drm_ttm_helper ttm drm_exec
> drm_suballoc_helper mfd_core drm_panel_backlight_quirks gpu_sched amdxcp drm_display_helper drm_kms_helper ahci libahci xhci_pci libata xhci_hcd drm nvme
> scsi_mod igc usbcore nvme_core scsi_common video nvme_keyring i2c_piix4 cec nvme_auth usb_common crc16 i2c_smbus wmi gpio_amdpt gpio_generic
> [ 2.793518] [ T331] CPU: 17 UID: 0 PID: 331 Comm: (udev-worker) Not tainted 7.1.0-rc4-next-20260519-rcunortlockdep-dirty #465 PREEMPT
> [ 2.793534] [ T331] Hardware name: ASUS System Product Name/ROG STRIX B850-F GAMING WIFI, BIOS 1627 02/05/2026
> [ 2.793547] [ T331] RIP: 0010:__mutex_lock+0x58d/0x10c0
> [ 2.793555] [ T331] Code: 4c 8b 4d 88 85 c0 0f 84 f8 fa ff ff 44 8b 15 ca 9b 81 00 45 85 d2 0f 85 e8 fa ff ff 48 8d 3d 1a 57 82 00 48 c7 c6 a6 51 9e 83
> <67> 48 0f b9 3a 4c 8b 4d 88 e9 cc fa ff ff 48 8b bd 78 ff ff ff e8
> [ 2.793579] [ T331] RSP: 0018:ffffa497016c3510 EFLAGS: 00010246
> [ 2.793588] [ T331] RAX: 0000000000000001 RBX: ffff88c33a4c2ad8 RCX: 0000000000000000
> [ 2.793598] [ T331] RDX: 0000000000000001 RSI: ffffffff839e51a6 RDI: ffffffff83de3c00
> [ 2.793609] [ T331] RBP: ffffa497016c35c0 R08: ffffffffc0a55d92 R09: 0000000000000000
> [ 2.793619] [ T331] R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000000 R12: 0000000000000000
> [ 2.793629] [ T331] R13: 0000000000000002 R14: ffffa497016c3550 R15: 0000000000268000
> [ 2.793641] [ T331] FS: 00007f1f32e5b9c0(0000) GS:ffff88d23b2ca000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
> [ 2.793653] [ T331] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
> [ 2.793662] [ T331] CR2: 000055cdfa28f588 CR3: 0000000112e73000 CR4: 0000000000f50ef0
> [ 2.793673] [ T331] PKRU: 55555554
> [ 2.793678] [ T331] Call Trace:
> [ 2.793683] [ T331] <TASK>
> [ 2.793687] [ T331] ? lock_acquire+0xbe/0x2d0
> [ 2.793696] [ T331] ? init_mqd+0x122/0x190 [amdgpu]
> [ 2.793809] [ T331] ? lock_release+0xc6/0x2a0
> [ 2.793816] [ T331] ? init_mqd+0x122/0x190 [amdgpu]
> [ 2.793902] [ T331] init_mqd+0x122/0x190 [amdgpu]
> [ 2.793961] [ T331] init_mqd_hiq+0xd/0x20 [amdgpu]
> [ 2.794015] [ T331] kq_initialize.constprop.0+0x2b8/0x370 [amdgpu]
> [ 2.794071] [ T331] kernel_queue_init+0x3f/0x60 [amdgpu]
> [ 2.794125] [ T331] pm_init+0x6b/0x100 [amdgpu]
> [ 2.794178] [ T331] start_cpsch+0x1d6/0x270 [amdgpu]
> [ 2.794234] [ T331] kgd2kfd_device_init.cold+0x7b9/0xa1a [amdgpu]
> [ 2.794365] [ T331] amdgpu_amdkfd_device_init+0x190/0x260 [amdgpu]
amdgpu_amdkfd_device_init()
kgd2kfd_device_init() {
....
init_mqd()
mutex_lock(... profiler_lock); <- FAIL
mutex_init(...profiler_lock);
}
Seems the famous graphics CI failed to catch this...
Thanks,
tglx
---
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_device.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_device.c
@@ -744,6 +744,9 @@ bool kgd2kfd_device_init(struct kfd_dev
KGD_ENGINE_SDMA1);
kfd->shared_resources = *gpu_resources;
+ kfd->profiler_process = NULL;
+ mutex_init(&kfd->profiler_lock);
+
kfd->num_nodes = amdgpu_xcp_get_num_xcp(kfd->adev->xcp_mgr);
if (kfd->num_nodes == 0) {
@@ -936,9 +939,6 @@ bool kgd2kfd_device_init(struct kfd_dev
svm_range_set_max_pages(kfd->adev);
- kfd->profiler_process = NULL;
- mutex_init(&kfd->profiler_lock);
-
kfd->init_complete = true;
dev_info(kfd_device, "added device %x:%x\n", kfd->adev->pdev->vendor,
kfd->adev->pdev->device);
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: context switch within RCU read-side critical section in next-20260518+ with PREEMPT_RT
2026-05-21 10:17 ` context switch within RCU read-side critical section in next-20260518+ with PREEMPT_RT Thomas Gleixner
@ 2026-05-21 10:21 ` Bert Karwatzki
2026-05-21 10:33 ` Mateusz Guzik
2026-05-21 12:55 ` [PATCH] amd/amdkfd: Initialize kfd_dev::profiler lock early Thomas Gleixner
1 sibling, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Bert Karwatzki @ 2026-05-21 10:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Gleixner, Mateusz Guzik, Christian Brauner
Cc: linux-kernel, linux-next, linux-rt-devel, linux-fsdevel,
adobriyan, jack, viro, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior, spasswolf,
Alex Deucher, amd-gfx
Am Donnerstag, dem 21.05.2026 um 12:17 +0200 schrieb Thomas Gleixner:
> On Thu, May 21 2026 at 11:20, Bert Karwatzki wrote:
> > Am Donnerstag, dem 21.05.2026 um 11:09 +0200 schrieb Mateusz Guzik:
> >
> > with next-20260519 (no RT, no LOCKDEP) and got no crash so far (4 boots only though (next-20260619
> > crashed in 2 out of 3 boots without RT)) but I get this warning on every boot:
> >
> > [ 2.793416] [ T331] ------------[ cut here ]------------
> > [ 2.793433] [ T331] DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(lock->magic != lock)
> > [ 2.793434] [ T331] WARNING: kernel/locking/mutex.c:625 at __mutex_lock+0x586/0x10c0, CPU#17: (udev-worker)/331
>
> So either the mutex is corrupted or was never initialized.
>
> > [ 2.793463] [ T331] Modules linked in: amdgpu(+) hid_generic usbhid drm_client_lib i2c_algo_bit drm_buddy hid drm_ttm_helper ttm drm_exec
> > drm_suballoc_helper mfd_core drm_panel_backlight_quirks gpu_sched amdxcp drm_display_helper drm_kms_helper ahci libahci xhci_pci libata xhci_hcd drm nvme
> > scsi_mod igc usbcore nvme_core scsi_common video nvme_keyring i2c_piix4 cec nvme_auth usb_common crc16 i2c_smbus wmi gpio_amdpt gpio_generic
> > [ 2.793518] [ T331] CPU: 17 UID: 0 PID: 331 Comm: (udev-worker) Not tainted 7.1.0-rc4-next-20260519-rcunortlockdep-dirty #465 PREEMPT
> > [ 2.793534] [ T331] Hardware name: ASUS System Product Name/ROG STRIX B850-F GAMING WIFI, BIOS 1627 02/05/2026
> > [ 2.793547] [ T331] RIP: 0010:__mutex_lock+0x58d/0x10c0
> > [ 2.793555] [ T331] Code: 4c 8b 4d 88 85 c0 0f 84 f8 fa ff ff 44 8b 15 ca 9b 81 00 45 85 d2 0f 85 e8 fa ff ff 48 8d 3d 1a 57 82 00 48 c7 c6 a6 51 9e 83
> > <67> 48 0f b9 3a 4c 8b 4d 88 e9 cc fa ff ff 48 8b bd 78 ff ff ff e8
> > [ 2.793579] [ T331] RSP: 0018:ffffa497016c3510 EFLAGS: 00010246
> > [ 2.793588] [ T331] RAX: 0000000000000001 RBX: ffff88c33a4c2ad8 RCX: 0000000000000000
> > [ 2.793598] [ T331] RDX: 0000000000000001 RSI: ffffffff839e51a6 RDI: ffffffff83de3c00
> > [ 2.793609] [ T331] RBP: ffffa497016c35c0 R08: ffffffffc0a55d92 R09: 0000000000000000
> > [ 2.793619] [ T331] R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000000 R12: 0000000000000000
> > [ 2.793629] [ T331] R13: 0000000000000002 R14: ffffa497016c3550 R15: 0000000000268000
> > [ 2.793641] [ T331] FS: 00007f1f32e5b9c0(0000) GS:ffff88d23b2ca000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
> > [ 2.793653] [ T331] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
> > [ 2.793662] [ T331] CR2: 000055cdfa28f588 CR3: 0000000112e73000 CR4: 0000000000f50ef0
> > [ 2.793673] [ T331] PKRU: 55555554
> > [ 2.793678] [ T331] Call Trace:
> > [ 2.793683] [ T331] <TASK>
> > [ 2.793687] [ T331] ? lock_acquire+0xbe/0x2d0
> > [ 2.793696] [ T331] ? init_mqd+0x122/0x190 [amdgpu]
> > [ 2.793809] [ T331] ? lock_release+0xc6/0x2a0
> > [ 2.793816] [ T331] ? init_mqd+0x122/0x190 [amdgpu]
> > [ 2.793902] [ T331] init_mqd+0x122/0x190 [amdgpu]
> > [ 2.793961] [ T331] init_mqd_hiq+0xd/0x20 [amdgpu]
> > [ 2.794015] [ T331] kq_initialize.constprop.0+0x2b8/0x370 [amdgpu]
> > [ 2.794071] [ T331] kernel_queue_init+0x3f/0x60 [amdgpu]
> > [ 2.794125] [ T331] pm_init+0x6b/0x100 [amdgpu]
> > [ 2.794178] [ T331] start_cpsch+0x1d6/0x270 [amdgpu]
> > [ 2.794234] [ T331] kgd2kfd_device_init.cold+0x7b9/0xa1a [amdgpu]
> > [ 2.794365] [ T331] amdgpu_amdkfd_device_init+0x190/0x260 [amdgpu]
>
> amdgpu_amdkfd_device_init()
> kgd2kfd_device_init() {
> ....
> init_mqd()
> mutex_lock(... profiler_lock); <- FAIL
>
> mutex_init(...profiler_lock);
> }
>
> Seems the famous graphics CI failed to catch this...
>
> Thanks,
>
> tglx
> ---
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_device.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_device.c
> @@ -744,6 +744,9 @@ bool kgd2kfd_device_init(struct kfd_dev
> KGD_ENGINE_SDMA1);
> kfd->shared_resources = *gpu_resources;
>
> + kfd->profiler_process = NULL;
> + mutex_init(&kfd->profiler_lock);
> +
> kfd->num_nodes = amdgpu_xcp_get_num_xcp(kfd->adev->xcp_mgr);
>
> if (kfd->num_nodes == 0) {
> @@ -936,9 +939,6 @@ bool kgd2kfd_device_init(struct kfd_dev
>
> svm_range_set_max_pages(kfd->adev);
>
> - kfd->profiler_process = NULL;
> - mutex_init(&kfd->profiler_lock);
> -
> kfd->init_complete = true;
> dev_info(kfd_device, "added device %x:%x\n", kfd->adev->pdev->vendor,
> kfd->adev->pdev->device);
Actually, when I test next-20260519 with the improved fix, I do not see
the warning from amdgpu.
diff --git a/fs/filesystems.c b/fs/filesystems.c
index 771fc31a69b8..712316a1e3e0 100644
--- a/fs/filesystems.c
+++ b/fs/filesystems.c
@@ -269,7 +269,7 @@ static __cold noinline int regen_filesystems_string(void)
hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(p, &file_systems, list) {
if (!(p->fs_flags & FS_REQUIRES_DEV))
newlen += strlen("nodev");
- newlen += strlen("\t") + strlen(p->name) + strlen("\n");
+ newlen += strlen("\t") + strlen(p->name) + strlen("\n");
}
spin_unlock(&file_systems_lock);
@@ -289,6 +289,7 @@ static __cold noinline int regen_filesystems_string(void)
* Did someone beat us to it?
*/
if (old && old->gen == file_systems_gen) {
+ spin_unlock(&file_systems_lock);
kfree(new);
return 0;
}
@@ -297,6 +298,7 @@ static __cold noinline int regen_filesystems_string(void)
* Did the list change in the meantime?
*/
if (gen != file_systems_gen) {
+ spin_unlock(&file_systems_lock);
kfree(new);
goto retry;
}
@@ -321,13 +323,12 @@ static __cold noinline int regen_filesystems_string(void)
* generation above and messes it up.
*/
spin_unlock(&file_systems_lock);
- if (old)
- kfree_rcu(old, rcu);
+ kfree(new);
return -EINVAL;
}
/*
- * Paired with consume fence in READ_ONCE() in filesystems_proc_show()
+ * Paired with consume fence in rcu_dereference() in filesystems_proc_show()
*/
smp_store_release(&file_systems_string, new);
spin_unlock(&file_systems_lock);
Bert Karwatzki
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: context switch within RCU read-side critical section in next-20260518+ with PREEMPT_RT
2026-05-21 10:21 ` Bert Karwatzki
@ 2026-05-21 10:33 ` Mateusz Guzik
2026-05-21 11:50 ` Bert Karwatzki
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Mateusz Guzik @ 2026-05-21 10:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bert Karwatzki
Cc: Thomas Gleixner, Christian Brauner, linux-kernel, linux-next,
linux-rt-devel, linux-fsdevel, adobriyan, jack, viro,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior, Alex Deucher, amd-gfx
On Thu, May 21, 2026 at 12:22 PM Bert Karwatzki <spasswolf@web.de> wrote:
>
> Am Donnerstag, dem 21.05.2026 um 12:17 +0200 schrieb Thomas Gleixner:
> > On Thu, May 21 2026 at 11:20, Bert Karwatzki wrote:
> > > Am Donnerstag, dem 21.05.2026 um 11:09 +0200 schrieb Mateusz Guzik:
> > >
> > > with next-20260519 (no RT, no LOCKDEP) and got no crash so far (4 boots only though (next-20260619
> > > crashed in 2 out of 3 boots without RT)) but I get this warning on every boot:
> > >
> > > [ 2.793416] [ T331] ------------[ cut here ]------------
> > > [ 2.793433] [ T331] DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(lock->magic != lock)
> > > [ 2.793434] [ T331] WARNING: kernel/locking/mutex.c:625 at __mutex_lock+0x586/0x10c0, CPU#17: (udev-worker)/331
> >
> > So either the mutex is corrupted or was never initialized.
> >
> > > [ 2.793463] [ T331] Modules linked in: amdgpu(+) hid_generic usbhid drm_client_lib i2c_algo_bit drm_buddy hid drm_ttm_helper ttm drm_exec
> > > drm_suballoc_helper mfd_core drm_panel_backlight_quirks gpu_sched amdxcp drm_display_helper drm_kms_helper ahci libahci xhci_pci libata xhci_hcd drm nvme
> > > scsi_mod igc usbcore nvme_core scsi_common video nvme_keyring i2c_piix4 cec nvme_auth usb_common crc16 i2c_smbus wmi gpio_amdpt gpio_generic
> > > [ 2.793518] [ T331] CPU: 17 UID: 0 PID: 331 Comm: (udev-worker) Not tainted 7.1.0-rc4-next-20260519-rcunortlockdep-dirty #465 PREEMPT
> > > [ 2.793534] [ T331] Hardware name: ASUS System Product Name/ROG STRIX B850-F GAMING WIFI, BIOS 1627 02/05/2026
> > > [ 2.793547] [ T331] RIP: 0010:__mutex_lock+0x58d/0x10c0
> > > [ 2.793555] [ T331] Code: 4c 8b 4d 88 85 c0 0f 84 f8 fa ff ff 44 8b 15 ca 9b 81 00 45 85 d2 0f 85 e8 fa ff ff 48 8d 3d 1a 57 82 00 48 c7 c6 a6 51 9e 83
> > > <67> 48 0f b9 3a 4c 8b 4d 88 e9 cc fa ff ff 48 8b bd 78 ff ff ff e8
> > > [ 2.793579] [ T331] RSP: 0018:ffffa497016c3510 EFLAGS: 00010246
> > > [ 2.793588] [ T331] RAX: 0000000000000001 RBX: ffff88c33a4c2ad8 RCX: 0000000000000000
> > > [ 2.793598] [ T331] RDX: 0000000000000001 RSI: ffffffff839e51a6 RDI: ffffffff83de3c00
> > > [ 2.793609] [ T331] RBP: ffffa497016c35c0 R08: ffffffffc0a55d92 R09: 0000000000000000
> > > [ 2.793619] [ T331] R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000000 R12: 0000000000000000
> > > [ 2.793629] [ T331] R13: 0000000000000002 R14: ffffa497016c3550 R15: 0000000000268000
> > > [ 2.793641] [ T331] FS: 00007f1f32e5b9c0(0000) GS:ffff88d23b2ca000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
> > > [ 2.793653] [ T331] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
> > > [ 2.793662] [ T331] CR2: 000055cdfa28f588 CR3: 0000000112e73000 CR4: 0000000000f50ef0
> > > [ 2.793673] [ T331] PKRU: 55555554
> > > [ 2.793678] [ T331] Call Trace:
> > > [ 2.793683] [ T331] <TASK>
> > > [ 2.793687] [ T331] ? lock_acquire+0xbe/0x2d0
> > > [ 2.793696] [ T331] ? init_mqd+0x122/0x190 [amdgpu]
> > > [ 2.793809] [ T331] ? lock_release+0xc6/0x2a0
> > > [ 2.793816] [ T331] ? init_mqd+0x122/0x190 [amdgpu]
> > > [ 2.793902] [ T331] init_mqd+0x122/0x190 [amdgpu]
> > > [ 2.793961] [ T331] init_mqd_hiq+0xd/0x20 [amdgpu]
> > > [ 2.794015] [ T331] kq_initialize.constprop.0+0x2b8/0x370 [amdgpu]
> > > [ 2.794071] [ T331] kernel_queue_init+0x3f/0x60 [amdgpu]
> > > [ 2.794125] [ T331] pm_init+0x6b/0x100 [amdgpu]
> > > [ 2.794178] [ T331] start_cpsch+0x1d6/0x270 [amdgpu]
> > > [ 2.794234] [ T331] kgd2kfd_device_init.cold+0x7b9/0xa1a [amdgpu]
> > > [ 2.794365] [ T331] amdgpu_amdkfd_device_init+0x190/0x260 [amdgpu]
> >
> > amdgpu_amdkfd_device_init()
> > kgd2kfd_device_init() {
> > ....
> > init_mqd()
> > mutex_lock(... profiler_lock); <- FAIL
> >
> > mutex_init(...profiler_lock);
> > }
> >
> > Seems the famous graphics CI failed to catch this...
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > tglx
> > ---
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_device.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_device.c
> > @@ -744,6 +744,9 @@ bool kgd2kfd_device_init(struct kfd_dev
> > KGD_ENGINE_SDMA1);
> > kfd->shared_resources = *gpu_resources;
> >
> > + kfd->profiler_process = NULL;
> > + mutex_init(&kfd->profiler_lock);
> > +
> > kfd->num_nodes = amdgpu_xcp_get_num_xcp(kfd->adev->xcp_mgr);
> >
> > if (kfd->num_nodes == 0) {
> > @@ -936,9 +939,6 @@ bool kgd2kfd_device_init(struct kfd_dev
> >
> > svm_range_set_max_pages(kfd->adev);
> >
> > - kfd->profiler_process = NULL;
> > - mutex_init(&kfd->profiler_lock);
> > -
> > kfd->init_complete = true;
> > dev_info(kfd_device, "added device %x:%x\n", kfd->adev->pdev->vendor,
> > kfd->adev->pdev->device);
>
> Actually, when I test next-20260519 with the improved fix, I do not see
> the warning from amdgpu.
>
Can you please do the following:
1. go back to the known crashing-tag, add my fix, verify you still get
the amd splat and then try out the fix provided by Thomas
2. regardless if the above helps, can you boot a kernel built with
CONFIG_KASAN=y
fwiw I verified my patch works fine with KASAN, including by
intentionally miscalculating the size of the target buffer and seeing
a nice splat from it so I'm confident I'm not corrupting anything.
However, as there are new mallocs + free flying around at early boot,
it is *plausible* amd was getting zeroed memory without asking for it
and it worked by accident.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: context switch within RCU read-side critical section in next-20260518+ with PREEMPT_RT
2026-05-21 10:33 ` Mateusz Guzik
@ 2026-05-21 11:50 ` Bert Karwatzki
2026-05-21 12:01 ` Mateusz Guzik
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Bert Karwatzki @ 2026-05-21 11:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mateusz Guzik
Cc: Thomas Gleixner, spasswolf, Christian Brauner, spasswolf,
linux-kernel, linux-next, linux-rt-devel, linux-fsdevel,
adobriyan, jack, viro, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior, Alex Deucher,
amd-gfx
>
> Can you please do the following:
> 1. go back to the known crashing-tag, add my fix, verify you still get
> the amd splat and then try out the fix provided by Thomas
> 2. regardless if the above helps, can you boot a kernel built with
> CONFIG_KASAN=y
>
> fwiw I verified my patch works fine with KASAN, including by
> intentionally miscalculating the size of the target buffer and seeing
> a nice splat from it so I'm confident I'm not corrupting anything.
> However, as there are new mallocs + free flying around at early boot,
> it is *plausible* amd was getting zeroed memory without asking for it
> and it worked by accident.
I think the warnning from amdgpu is only displayed with CONFIG_LOCKDEP=y, so
your "improved fix" does not silence the warning from amdgpu.
The additional fix from Thomas fixes the amdgpu warning.
I also built the kernel with CONFIG_KASAN and get no error messages.
Bert Karwatzki
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: context switch within RCU read-side critical section in next-20260518+ with PREEMPT_RT
2026-05-21 11:50 ` Bert Karwatzki
@ 2026-05-21 12:01 ` Mateusz Guzik
2026-05-28 17:59 ` Bert Karwatzki
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Mateusz Guzik @ 2026-05-21 12:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bert Karwatzki
Cc: Thomas Gleixner, Christian Brauner, linux-kernel, linux-next,
linux-rt-devel, linux-fsdevel, adobriyan, jack, viro,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior, Alex Deucher, amd-gfx
On Thu, May 21, 2026 at 1:51 PM Bert Karwatzki <spasswolf@web.de> wrote:
>
>
> >
> > Can you please do the following:
> > 1. go back to the known crashing-tag, add my fix, verify you still get
> > the amd splat and then try out the fix provided by Thomas
> > 2. regardless if the above helps, can you boot a kernel built with
> > CONFIG_KASAN=y
> >
> > fwiw I verified my patch works fine with KASAN, including by
> > intentionally miscalculating the size of the target buffer and seeing
> > a nice splat from it so I'm confident I'm not corrupting anything.
> > However, as there are new mallocs + free flying around at early boot,
> > it is *plausible* amd was getting zeroed memory without asking for it
> > and it worked by accident.
>
> I think the warnning from amdgpu is only displayed with CONFIG_LOCKDEP=y, so
> your "improved fix" does not silence the warning from amdgpu.
>
> The additional fix from Thomas fixes the amdgpu warning.
>
I just wanted to confirm my patch does not *cause* issues, at worst
uncovers them.
> I also built the kernel with CONFIG_KASAN and get no error messages.
>
nice
I presume Thomas will handle getting the amdgpu patch to the right
people, I think it will be fine to drop all the mailing lists and the
cc's. :-)
So overall I think we are done here.
Thank you for testing and sorry for the breakage.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] amd/amdkfd: Initialize kfd_dev::profiler lock early
2026-05-21 10:17 ` context switch within RCU read-side critical section in next-20260518+ with PREEMPT_RT Thomas Gleixner
2026-05-21 10:21 ` Bert Karwatzki
@ 2026-05-21 12:55 ` Thomas Gleixner
1 sibling, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2026-05-21 12:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bert Karwatzki; +Cc: linux-kernel, Alex Deucher, amd-gfx, Felix Kuehling
Bert reported the following lockdep splat:
DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(lock->magic != lock)
WARNING: kernel/locking/mutex.c:625 at __mutex_lock+0x586/0x10c0, CPU#17: (udev-worker)/331
RIP: 0010:__mutex_lock+0x58d/0x10c0
init_mqd+0x122/0x190 [amdgpu]
init_mqd_hiq+0xd/0x20 [amdgpu]
kq_initialize.constprop.0+0x2b8/0x370 [amdgpu]
kernel_queue_init+0x3f/0x60 [amdgpu]
pm_init+0x6b/0x100 [amdgpu]
start_cpsch+0x1d6/0x270 [amdgpu]
kgd2kfd_device_init.cold+0x7b9/0xa1a [amdgpu]
amdgpu_amdkfd_device_init+0x190/0x260 [amdgpu]
amdgpu_device_init.cold+0x1952/0x1c79 [amdgpu]
amdgpu_driver_load_kms+0x14/0x80 [amdgpu]
Some implementations of init_mqd() acquire kfd_dev->profile_lock, which is
initialized in kgd2kfd_device_init() after init_mqd() was invoked via the
above callchain. So init_mqd() tries to lock an uninitialized mutex.
Move the initialization to the beginning of kgd2kfd_device_init() to cure
that.
Fixes: a789761de305 ("amd/amdkfd: Add kfd_ioctl_profiler to contain profiler kernel driver changes")
Reported-by: Bert Karwatzki <spasswolf@web.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@kernel.org>
Cc: Benjamin Welton <bewelton@amd.com>
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/4f548d61b2dd12e01f401ce4b8c865f238f7b23c.camel@web.de/
---
drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_device.c | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_device.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_device.c
@@ -744,6 +744,9 @@ bool kgd2kfd_device_init(struct kfd_dev
KGD_ENGINE_SDMA1);
kfd->shared_resources = *gpu_resources;
+ kfd->profiler_process = NULL;
+ mutex_init(&kfd->profiler_lock);
+
kfd->num_nodes = amdgpu_xcp_get_num_xcp(kfd->adev->xcp_mgr);
if (kfd->num_nodes == 0) {
@@ -936,9 +939,6 @@ bool kgd2kfd_device_init(struct kfd_dev
svm_range_set_max_pages(kfd->adev);
- kfd->profiler_process = NULL;
- mutex_init(&kfd->profiler_lock);
-
kfd->init_complete = true;
dev_info(kfd_device, "added device %x:%x\n", kfd->adev->pdev->vendor,
kfd->adev->pdev->device);
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: context switch within RCU read-side critical section in next-20260518+ with PREEMPT_RT
2026-05-21 12:01 ` Mateusz Guzik
@ 2026-05-28 17:59 ` Bert Karwatzki
2026-05-29 17:20 ` Mateusz Guzik
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Bert Karwatzki @ 2026-05-28 17:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mateusz Guzik
Cc: Thomas Gleixner, spasswolf, Christian Brauner, linux-kernel,
linux-next, linux-rt-devel, linux-fsdevel, adobriyan, jack, viro,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior, Alex Deucher, amd-gfx
Am Donnerstag, dem 21.05.2026 um 14:01 +0200 schrieb Mateusz Guzik:
>
> So overall I think we are done here.
>
> Thank you for testing and sorry for the breakage.
Just as a reminder, this has not been fixed in linux-next, yet,
up to version next-20260528.
Bert Karwatzki
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: context switch within RCU read-side critical section in next-20260518+ with PREEMPT_RT
2026-05-28 17:59 ` Bert Karwatzki
@ 2026-05-29 17:20 ` Mateusz Guzik
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Mateusz Guzik @ 2026-05-29 17:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bert Karwatzki
Cc: Thomas Gleixner, Christian Brauner, linux-kernel, linux-next,
linux-rt-devel, linux-fsdevel, adobriyan, jack, viro,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior, Alex Deucher, amd-gfx
On Thu, May 28, 2026 at 7:59 PM Bert Karwatzki <spasswolf@web.de> wrote:
>
> Am Donnerstag, dem 21.05.2026 um 14:01 +0200 schrieb Mateusz Guzik:
> >
> > So overall I think we are done here.
> >
> > Thank you for testing and sorry for the breakage.
>
> Just as a reminder, this has not been fixed in linux-next, yet,
> up to version next-20260528.
>
I sent a v4 of the patchset with some extra touch ups:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/20260529171840.2576445-1-mjguzik@gmail.com/T/#t
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2026-06-01 7:27 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <20260520225245.2962-1-spasswolf@web.de>
[not found] ` <fnrz73n5jojl2wlbgrsjdtu5zuwykwbcjzznaijbquuovpoand@i6ihdqn7a6zv>
[not found] ` <s7cu3dpioidx6mepmai6eyj2pxjs4skbw7v534zbzs6g2fwcis@cvokidcxy3xa>
[not found] ` <4f548d61b2dd12e01f401ce4b8c865f238f7b23c.camel@web.de>
2026-05-21 10:17 ` context switch within RCU read-side critical section in next-20260518+ with PREEMPT_RT Thomas Gleixner
2026-05-21 10:21 ` Bert Karwatzki
2026-05-21 10:33 ` Mateusz Guzik
2026-05-21 11:50 ` Bert Karwatzki
2026-05-21 12:01 ` Mateusz Guzik
2026-05-28 17:59 ` Bert Karwatzki
2026-05-29 17:20 ` Mateusz Guzik
2026-05-21 12:55 ` [PATCH] amd/amdkfd: Initialize kfd_dev::profiler lock early Thomas Gleixner
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox