Linux CXL
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Dave Jiang" <dave.jiang@intel.com>
Cc: linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 06/10] ACPI: extlog: Defer CXL protocol error handling to avoid lock inversion
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2026 18:44:36 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260717184436.D6D211F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260717161647.1493259-7-dave.jiang@intel.com>

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:

Pre-existing issues:
- [High] Preexisting lock inversion (AA deadlock) between process context and IRQ context on CPER work locks.
- [Medium] extlog_print_pcie() is compiled out due to a misspelled preprocessor macro, rendering the function and its newly added bounds check dead code.
--

--- Patch [6]: [PATCH v3 06/10] ACPI: extlog: Defer CXL protocol error handling to avoid lock inversion ---
commit 004b48e5ad5ad98c6645296077a38ad36a959b26
Author: Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@intel.com>

ACPI: extlog: Defer CXL protocol error handling to avoid lock inversion

The commit exports cxl_cper_post_prot_err() from ghes.c and modifies
extlog_print() to use it. This avoids an AB-BA deadlock by deferring CXL
protocol error handling to a workqueue instead of calling it synchronously
while holding the MCE notifier chain rwsem.

Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-cxl/20260709165457.8BA181F000E9@smtp.kernel.org/

> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpi_extlog.c b/drivers/acpi/acpi_extlog.c
> index 0c440d75d9a78..ae79d090de33b 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_extlog.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_extlog.c
[ ... ]
> @@ -244,9 +227,9 @@ static int extlog_print(struct notifier_block *nb, unsigned long val,
>  			struct cxl_cper_sec_prot_err *prot_err =
>  				acpi_hest_get_payload(gdata);
>  
> -			extlog_cxl_cper_handle_prot_err(prot_err,
> -							gdata->error_severity,
> -							gdata->error_data_length);
> +			cxl_cper_post_prot_err(prot_err,
> +					       gdata->error_severity,
> +					       gdata->error_data_length);
>  		} else if (guid_equal(sec_type, &CPER_SEC_PCIE)) {
>  			struct cper_sec_pcie *pcie_err = acpi_hest_get_payload(gdata);
>  

[Severity: Medium]
This isn't a bug introduced by this patch, but does the extlog_print_pcie()
function called for this section type get entirely compiled out?

Looking at extlog_print_pcie() in drivers/acpi/acpi_extlog.c:

drivers/acpi/acpi_extlog.c:extlog_print_pcie() {
#ifdef ACPI_APEI_PCIEAER
    ...
}

Kernel Kconfig macros must use the CONFIG_ prefix to evaluate to true. Since
it checks for ACPI_APEI_PCIEAER instead of CONFIG_ACPI_APEI_PCIEAER, does this
silently disable PCIe AER error logging via the extlog driver and render the
newly added bounds check dead code?

> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c b/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c
> index 17e4ef5552925..b8dbd99da47ef 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c
> @@ -752,8 +752,8 @@ static DEFINE_KFIFO(cxl_cper_prot_err_fifo, struct cxl_cper_prot_err_work_data,
>  static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(cxl_cper_prot_err_work_lock);
>  struct work_struct *cxl_cper_prot_err_work;
>  
> -static void cxl_cper_post_prot_err(struct cxl_cper_sec_prot_err *prot_err,
> -				   int severity, u32 len)
> +void cxl_cper_post_prot_err(struct cxl_cper_sec_prot_err *prot_err,
> +			    int severity, u32 len)
>  {

[Severity: High]
This is a pre-existing issue, but can this cause an AA deadlock?

Looking at cxl_cper_register_prot_err_work() and
cxl_cper_unregister_prot_err_work() in drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c, they acquire
the cxl_cper_prot_err_work_lock using guard(spinlock) without disabling
interrupts since they execute in process context:

drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c:cxl_cper_register_prot_err_work() {
    ...
    guard(spinlock)(&cxl_cper_prot_err_work_lock);
    ...
}

If an asynchronous hardware error interrupt fires on the same CPU while this
lock is held, the interrupt handler calls cxl_cper_post_prot_err() which
attempts to acquire the exact same lock using guard(spinlock_irqsave):

drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c:cxl_cper_post_prot_err() {
    ...
    guard(spinlock_irqsave)(&cxl_cper_prot_err_work_lock);
    ...
}

Would this cause the interrupt handler to spin forever waiting for the lock
that the interrupted process context currently holds?

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260717161647.1493259-1-dave.jiang@intel.com?part=6

  reply	other threads:[~2026-07-17 18:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-07-17 16:16 [PATCH v3 00/10] ACPI: APEI: GHES: Collection of fixes for issues reported by sashiko Dave Jiang
2026-07-17 16:16 ` [PATCH v3 01/10] ACPI: APEI: GHES: Bound CXL event record copy to the firmware section length Dave Jiang
2026-07-17 17:09   ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-17 16:16 ` [PATCH v3 02/10] efi/cper: Reject CPER records with an out-of-range error_data_length Dave Jiang
2026-07-17 17:26   ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-17 16:16 ` [PATCH v3 03/10] ACPI: APEI: GHES: Validate CXL protocol error section length before RAS cap copy Dave Jiang
2026-07-17 17:41   ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-17 16:16 ` [PATCH v3 04/10] ACPI: extlog: Avoid populating software AER metadata from raw hardware buffer Dave Jiang
2026-07-17 17:58   ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-17 16:16 ` [PATCH v3 05/10] ACPI: extlog: Validate PCIe error section length before payload access Dave Jiang
2026-07-17 18:29   ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-17 16:16 ` [PATCH v3 06/10] ACPI: extlog: Defer CXL protocol error handling to avoid lock inversion Dave Jiang
2026-07-17 18:44   ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-07-17 16:16 ` [PATCH v3 07/10] ACPI: extlog: Fix CONFIG_ACPI_APEI_PCIEAER guard typo Dave Jiang
2026-07-17 19:07   ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-17 21:24   ` Dave Jiang
2026-07-17 16:16 ` [PATCH v3 08/10] ACPI: APEI: GHES: Validate memory error section length before payload access Dave Jiang
2026-07-17 19:23   ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-17 16:16 ` [PATCH v3 09/10] ACPI: APEI: GHES: Bound AER info copy and sanitize software metadata Dave Jiang
2026-07-17 19:39   ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-17 16:16 ` [PATCH v3 10/10] ACPI: extlog: Validate elog record length before walking sections Dave Jiang
2026-07-17 19:57   ` sashiko-bot

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=20260717184436.D6D211F000E9@smtp.kernel.org \
    --to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
    --cc=dave.jiang@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
    /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