From: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@linaro.org>
To: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <lpieralisi@kernel.org>,
Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@huawei.com>,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>, Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Danilo Krummrich <dakr@kernel.org>,
Stuart Yoder <stuyoder@gmail.com>,
Laurentiu Tudor <laurentiu.tudor@nxp.com>,
Nipun Gupta <nipun.gupta@amd.com>,
Nikhil Agarwal <nikhil.agarwal@amd.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
Cc: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, iommu@lists.linux.dev,
devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
"Charan Teja Kalla" <quic_charante@quicinc.com>,
"Peter Griffin" <peter.griffin@linaro.org>,
"André Draszik" <andre.draszik@linaro.org>,
"Juan Yescas" <jyescas@google.com>,
kernel-team@android.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] iommu: Get DT/ACPI parsing into the proper probe path
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2026 19:18:08 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <67b32e90-1f60-4bf5-b534-b4a901d5a796@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e3b191e6fd6ca9a1e84c5e5e40044faf97abb874.1740753261.git.robin.murphy@arm.com>
Hi, Robin,
On 2/28/25 5:46 PM, Robin Murphy wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
> index a3b45b84f42b..1cec7074367a 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
> @@ -414,9 +414,21 @@ static int iommu_init_device(struct device *dev)
> if (!dev_iommu_get(dev))
> return -ENOMEM;
> /*
> - * For FDT-based systems and ACPI IORT/VIOT, drivers register IOMMU
> - * instances with non-NULL fwnodes, and client devices should have been
> - * identified with a fwspec by this point. Otherwise, we can currently
> + * For FDT-based systems and ACPI IORT/VIOT, the common firmware parsing
> + * is buried in the bus dma_configure path. Properly unpicking that is
> + * still a big job, so for now just invoke the whole thing. The device
> + * already having a driver bound means dma_configure has already run and
> + * either found no IOMMU to wait for, or we're in its replay call right
> + * now, so either way there's no point calling it again.
> + */
> + if (!dev->driver && dev->bus->dma_configure) {
> + mutex_unlock(&iommu_probe_device_lock);
> + dev->bus->dma_configure(dev);
> + mutex_lock(&iommu_probe_device_lock);
> + }
I was chasing the "something fishy" dev_WARN on a 6.19+ downstream
android kernel and while looking at the IOMMU code I couldn't help
myself and ask whether we shall prevent concurrent execution of
dma_configure().
It seems to me that while the IOMMU subsystem is executing
dma_configure(), the deferred probe workqueue can concurrently pick up
the same device, enter really_probe(), set dev->driver, and execute
dma_configure(). Is it worth protecting against this?
I can try to prove it if needed, using a downstream iommu driver (sigh).
Thanks!
ta
diff --git a/drivers/iommu/iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
index e61927b4d41f..5f0c1a8064b5 100644
--- a/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
+++ b/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
@@ -461,9 +461,19 @@ static int iommu_init_device(struct device *dev)
* already having a driver bound means dma_configure has already run and
* found no IOMMU to wait for, so there's no point calling it again.
*/
- if (!dev->iommu->fwspec && !dev->driver && dev->bus->dma_configure) {
+ if (!dev->iommu->fwspec && !READ_ONCE(dev->driver) &&
+ dev->bus->dma_configure) {
mutex_unlock(&iommu_probe_device_lock);
- dev->bus->dma_configure(dev);
+
+ /*
+ * Serialize with really_probe(). Recheck dev->driver in case a
+ * driver bound while we were waiting for the lock.
+ */
+ device_lock(dev);
+ if (!dev->driver)
+ dev->bus->dma_configure(dev);
+ device_unlock(dev);
+
mutex_lock(&iommu_probe_device_lock);
/* If another instance finished the job for us, skip it */
if (!dev->iommu || dev->iommu_group)
(END)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-23 17:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 47+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-28 15:46 [PATCH v2 0/4] iommu: Fix the longstanding probe issues Robin Murphy
2025-02-28 15:46 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] iommu: Handle race with default domain setup Robin Murphy
2025-02-28 15:46 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] iommu: Resolve ops in iommu_init_device() Robin Murphy
2025-03-05 17:55 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-02-28 15:46 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] iommu: Keep dev->iommu state consistent Robin Murphy
2025-03-05 18:14 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-02-28 15:46 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] iommu: Get DT/ACPI parsing into the proper probe path Robin Murphy
2025-03-05 18:28 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-03-07 14:24 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2025-03-07 20:20 ` Robin Murphy
2025-03-11 18:42 ` Joerg Roedel
2025-03-12 7:07 ` Baolu Lu
2025-03-12 10:10 ` Robin Murphy
2025-03-12 14:34 ` Baolu Lu
2025-03-12 15:21 ` Joerg Roedel
2025-03-13 9:56 ` Marek Szyprowski
2025-03-13 11:01 ` Robin Murphy
2025-03-13 12:23 ` Marek Szyprowski
2025-03-13 13:06 ` Robin Murphy
2025-03-13 14:12 ` Robin Murphy
2025-03-17 7:37 ` Marek Szyprowski
2025-03-17 18:22 ` Robin Murphy
2025-03-21 12:15 ` Marek Szyprowski
2025-03-21 16:48 ` Robin Murphy
2025-04-01 20:34 ` Marek Szyprowski
2025-03-13 16:30 ` Anders Roxell
2025-03-18 16:37 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2025-03-18 17:24 ` Robin Murphy
2025-03-25 15:32 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2025-03-27 9:47 ` Chen-Yu Tsai
2025-03-27 11:00 ` Louis-Alexis Eyraud
2025-04-11 8:02 ` Johan Hovold
2025-04-14 15:37 ` Robin Murphy
2025-04-15 15:08 ` Johan Hovold
2025-04-24 13:58 ` Robin Murphy
2025-04-21 21:19 ` William McVicker
2025-04-22 19:00 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-04-22 21:55 ` William McVicker
2025-04-22 23:41 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-04-23 17:31 ` William McVicker
2025-04-23 18:18 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-08-11 16:44 ` Eric Auger
2025-08-11 17:01 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2026-03-23 17:18 ` Tudor Ambarus [this message]
2026-03-23 20:49 ` Robin Murphy
2026-04-01 11:49 ` Tudor Ambarus
2025-03-10 8:29 ` [PATCH v2 0/4] iommu: Fix the longstanding probe issues Joerg Roedel
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=67b32e90-1f60-4bf5-b534-b4a901d5a796@linaro.org \
--to=tudor.ambarus@linaro.org \
--cc=andre.draszik@linaro.org \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=dakr@kernel.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=guohanjun@huawei.com \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=jyescas@google.com \
--cc=kernel-team@android.com \
--cc=laurentiu.tudor@nxp.com \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=lpieralisi@kernel.org \
--cc=nikhil.agarwal@amd.com \
--cc=nipun.gupta@amd.com \
--cc=peter.griffin@linaro.org \
--cc=quic_charante@quicinc.com \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=stuyoder@gmail.com \
--cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox