* [PATCH] net: sunplus: fix tx_poll spin_lock missing irqsave in NAPI context @ 2026-08-20 13:01 Andrew Gaylard 2026-08-22 20:50 ` Jakub Kicinski 2026-08-22 20:51 ` Jakub Kicinski 0 siblings, 2 replies; 4+ messages in thread From: Andrew Gaylard @ 2026-08-20 13:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: netdev Cc: wellslutw, andrew+netdev, davem, edumazet, kuba, pabeni, linux-arm-kernel, Andrew Gaylard spl2sw_tx_poll() runs in NAPI (softirq) context and acquires comm->tx_lock with plain spin_lock(). The hardirq handler spl2sw_ethernet_interrupt() acquires the same lock, so a hardirq on the same CPU while the NAPI poll holds the lock would deadlock with IRQs disabled. Use spin_lock_irqsave/spin_unlock_irqrestore. Signed-off-by: Andrew Gaylard <ag@ffroot.co.za> --- drivers/net/ethernet/sunplus/spl2sw_int.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/sunplus/spl2sw_int.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/sunplus/spl2sw_int.c index a37c9a4c281f..7e07cd941434 100644 --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/sunplus/spl2sw_int.c +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/sunplus/spl2sw_int.c @@ -147,7 +147,7 @@ int spl2sw_tx_poll(struct napi_struct *napi, int budget) u32 cmd; int i; - spin_lock(&comm->tx_lock); + spin_lock_irqsave(&comm->tx_lock, flags); tx_done_pos = comm->tx_done_pos; while (((tx_done_pos != comm->tx_pos) || (comm->tx_desc_full == 1)) && budget_left) { @@ -196,7 +196,7 @@ int spl2sw_tx_poll(struct napi_struct *napi, int budget) if (netif_queue_stopped(comm->ndev[i])) netif_wake_queue(comm->ndev[i]); - spin_unlock(&comm->tx_lock); + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&comm->tx_lock, flags); spin_lock_irqsave(&comm->int_mask_lock, flags); mask = readl(comm->l2sw_reg_base + L2SW_SW_INT_MASK_0); -- 2.53.0 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] net: sunplus: fix tx_poll spin_lock missing irqsave in NAPI context 2026-08-20 13:01 [PATCH] net: sunplus: fix tx_poll spin_lock missing irqsave in NAPI context Andrew Gaylard @ 2026-08-22 20:50 ` Jakub Kicinski 2026-08-22 20:51 ` Jakub Kicinski 1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread From: Jakub Kicinski @ 2026-08-22 20:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ag Cc: Jakub Kicinski, netdev, wellslutw, andrew+netdev, davem, edumazet, pabeni, linux-arm-kernel This is an AI-generated review of your patch. The human sending this email has considered the AI review valid, or at least plausible. --- net: sunplus: fix tx_poll spin_lock missing irqsave in NAPI context This converts the comm->tx_lock acquisition in spl2sw_tx_poll() from spin_lock()/spin_unlock() to spin_lock_irqsave()/spin_unlock_irqrestore(), reusing the existing flags variable. The stated reason is a possible same-CPU deadlock against the hardirq handler. > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/sunplus/spl2sw_int.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/sunplus/spl2sw_int.c > index a37c9a4c281f0..7e07cd9414347 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/sunplus/spl2sw_int.c > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/sunplus/spl2sw_int.c > spl2sw_tx_poll() runs in NAPI (softirq) context and acquires > comm->tx_lock with plain spin_lock(). The hardirq handler > spl2sw_ethernet_interrupt() acquires the same lock, so a hardirq on > the same CPU while the NAPI poll holds the lock would deadlock with > IRQs disabled. Use spin_lock_irqsave/spin_unlock_irqrestore. [Severity: Medium] Is the claim that "The hardirq handler spl2sw_ethernet_interrupt() acquires the same lock" accurate? Looking at spl2sw_ethernet_interrupt() in drivers/net/ethernet/sunplus/spl2sw_int.c, every acquisition there is of comm->int_mask_lock, not comm->tx_lock: if (status & MAC_INT_TX) { /* Disable TX interrupts. */ spin_lock(&comm->int_mask_lock); mask = readl(comm->l2sw_reg_base + L2SW_SW_INT_MASK_0); mask |= MAC_INT_TX; writel(mask, comm->l2sw_reg_base + L2SW_SW_INT_MASK_0); spin_unlock(&comm->int_mask_lock); ... napi_schedule(&comm->tx_napi); } The other acquirers of comm->tx_lock are spl2sw_ethernet_start_xmit() and spl2sw_ethernet_tx_timeout() in drivers/net/ethernet/sunplus/spl2sw_driver.c, both in non-hardirq context and both already using spin_lock_irqsave(). With spl2sw_tx_poll() that appears to be the complete set of acquirers, and none of them run in hardirq context. Does that mean the plain spin_lock() in the softirq-only holder was already correct, and the described same-CPU self-deadlock cannot occur? The declaration in drivers/net/ethernet/sunplus/spl2sw_define.h also seems to draw the distinction between the two locks: spinlock_t tx_lock; /* spinlock for accessing tx buffer */ > @@ -147,7 +147,7 @@ int spl2sw_tx_poll(struct napi_struct *napi, int budget) > u32 cmd; > int i; > > - spin_lock(&comm->tx_lock); > + spin_lock_irqsave(&comm->tx_lock, flags); > > tx_done_pos = comm->tx_done_pos; > while (((tx_done_pos != comm->tx_pos) || (comm->tx_desc_full == 1)) && budget_left) { [Severity: Medium] With no hardirq contender for comm->tx_lock, does this change simply extend the hard-IRQ-disabled window over the whole TX reclaim path? The section now covered with interrupts off in spl2sw_tx_poll() is up to a full NAPI budget of descriptors, each doing: dma_unmap_single(&comm->pdev->dev, skbinfo->mapping, skbinfo->len, DMA_TO_DEVICE); skbinfo->mapping = 0; dev_kfree_skb_irq(skbinfo->skb); followed by the netif_wake_queue() loop over MAX_NETDEV_NUM devices. If the intent is only to make the tx_lock users look consistent with spl2sw_ethernet_start_xmit() and spl2sw_ethernet_tx_timeout(), could the changelog say that and drop the deadlock description, along with the "fix" in the subject? > - spin_unlock(&comm->tx_lock); > + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&comm->tx_lock, flags); > > spin_lock_irqsave(&comm->int_mask_lock, flags); > mask = readl(comm->l2sw_reg_base + L2SW_SW_INT_MASK_0); [Severity: Low] One note on tagging: a patch described as fixing an IRQs-disabled deadlock would normally carry a Fixes: tag, and git blame shows the plain spin_lock(&comm->tx_lock) here came in with fd3040b9394c ("net: ethernet: Add driver for Sunplus SP7021"). Given that spl2sw_ethernet_interrupt() only ever takes comm->int_mask_lock, would such a tag point at a bug that was never there? Rewording the changelog as a cleanup instead of a fix seems like the way to avoid the question entirely. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] net: sunplus: fix tx_poll spin_lock missing irqsave in NAPI context 2026-08-20 13:01 [PATCH] net: sunplus: fix tx_poll spin_lock missing irqsave in NAPI context Andrew Gaylard 2026-08-22 20:50 ` Jakub Kicinski @ 2026-08-22 20:51 ` Jakub Kicinski 2026-08-24 12:33 ` Andrew Gaylard 1 sibling, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: Jakub Kicinski @ 2026-08-22 20:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Gaylard Cc: netdev, wellslutw, andrew+netdev, davem, edumazet, pabeni, linux-arm-kernel On Thu, 20 Aug 2026 15:01:59 +0200 Andrew Gaylard wrote: > spl2sw_tx_poll() runs in NAPI (softirq) context and acquires > comm->tx_lock with plain spin_lock(). The hardirq handler > spl2sw_ethernet_interrupt() acquires the same lock, so a hardirq on > the same CPU while the NAPI poll holds the lock would deadlock with > IRQs disabled. Use spin_lock_irqsave/spin_unlock_irqrestore. Please explain how the issue was found and how the fix was tested. I mean - this is an ancient driver, if you don't have a way to test the fix you should not be sending the patch. -- pw-bot: cr ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] net: sunplus: fix tx_poll spin_lock missing irqsave in NAPI context 2026-08-22 20:51 ` Jakub Kicinski @ 2026-08-24 12:33 ` Andrew Gaylard 0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread From: Andrew Gaylard @ 2026-08-24 12:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jakub Kicinski Cc: netdev, wellslutw, andrew+netdev, davem, edumazet, pabeni, linux-arm-kernel Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org> writes: > On Thu, 20 Aug 2026 15:01:59 +0200 Andrew Gaylard wrote: >> spl2sw_tx_poll() runs in NAPI (softirq) context and acquires >> comm->tx_lock with plain spin_lock(). The hardirq handler >> spl2sw_ethernet_interrupt() acquires the same lock, so a hardirq on >> the same CPU while the NAPI poll holds the lock would deadlock with >> IRQs disabled. Use spin_lock_irqsave/spin_unlock_irqrestore. > > Please explain how the issue was found and how the fix was tested. > I mean - this is an ancient driver, if you don't have a way to test the > fix you should not be sending the patch. I'm testing on a Tibbo LTTP3G2 board: https://tibbo.com/store/tps/ltpp3g2.html This work is part of getting it to boot, getting it stable, adding a couple of missing drivers, and sending the changes upstream. I found the issue using lockdep. At least, I though I did, but I've not been able to reproduce it, so I must have been mistaken. Apologies. Please drop this patch. -- Andrew ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2026-08-24 12:34 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2026-08-20 13:01 [PATCH] net: sunplus: fix tx_poll spin_lock missing irqsave in NAPI context Andrew Gaylard 2026-08-22 20:50 ` Jakub Kicinski 2026-08-22 20:51 ` Jakub Kicinski 2026-08-24 12:33 ` Andrew Gaylard
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox