From: Richard Cheng <icheng@nvidia.com>
To: Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@intel.com>
Cc: linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org, djbw@kernel.org, dave@stgolabs.net,
jic23@kernel.org, alison.schofield@intel.com,
vishal.l.verma@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cxl/features: Serialize multi-part Get/Set Feature transfers
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2026 17:52:25 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alS0YGIqRfGBVCWl@MWDK4CY14F> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260709155841.1895915-1-dave.jiang@intel.com>
On Thu, Jul 09, 2026 at 08:58:41AM +0800, Dave Jiang wrote:
> A Get or Set Feature payload larger than the mailbox payload size is
> split into several mailbox commands. mbox_mutex only serializes
> individual mailbox commands and is dropped between iterations of these
> loops. Nothing serializes the multi-part transfer as a whole.
> cxl_get_feature() and cxl_set_feature() are reachable concurrently
> from fwctl (per-fd RPCs run under a read-held registration lock) and
> from the EDAC scrub/ECS/repair paths, so two transfers to the same
> mailbox can interleave their parts and corrupt the device's transfer
> context.
>
Hi Dave,
I have some opinion maybe worth discussing.
Get Feature does not have transfer state, it uses an offset and count.
For Set Feature, the device must reject a second transfer with Feature
Transfer in progress.
Maybe we should reword this as preventing concurrent Set failures and
preventing a multi-part Get from spanning a Set update? I don't think
"currupt the device's transfer context" is accutate.
> Add a per-mailbox feat_mutex and hold it across the whole transfer in
> both functions. It nests outside mbox_mutex (which is taken inside
> cxl_internal_send_cmd()), and is taken nowhere else, so no lock-ordering
> inversion is introduced.
>
> Link: https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260702090849.47501-1-icheng@nvidia.com?part=1
> Fixes: 5e5ac21f629d ("cxl/mbox: Add GET_FEATURE mailbox command")
> Fixes: 14d502cc2718 ("cxl/mbox: Add SET_FEATURE mailbox command")
> Assisted-by: Claude:claude-opus-4-8
> Signed-off-by: Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/cxl/core/features.c | 3 +++
> drivers/cxl/core/mbox.c | 1 +
> include/cxl/mailbox.h | 2 ++
> 3 files changed, 6 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cxl/core/features.c b/drivers/cxl/core/features.c
> index 85185af46b72..85d6bcdc360e 100644
> --- a/drivers/cxl/core/features.c
> +++ b/drivers/cxl/core/features.c
> @@ -240,6 +240,8 @@ size_t cxl_get_feature(struct cxl_mailbox *cxl_mbox, const uuid_t *feat_uuid,
> size_out = min(feat_out_size, cxl_mbox->payload_size);
> uuid_copy(&pi.uuid, feat_uuid);
> pi.selection = selection;
> +
> + guard(mutex)(&cxl_mbox->feat_mutex);
> do {
> data_to_rd_size = min(feat_out_size - data_rcvd_size,
> cxl_mbox->payload_size);
> @@ -314,6 +316,7 @@ int cxl_set_feature(struct cxl_mailbox *cxl_mbox,
> data_in_size = cxl_mbox->payload_size - hdr_size;
> }
>
> + guard(mutex)(&cxl_mbox->feat_mutex);
What about RAW command path ?
With CONFIG_CXL_MEM_RAW_COMMANDS=y, GET_FEATURE and SET_FEATURE can be
sent directly through mbox_send() without taking feat_mutex.
Or you want to keep the scope minimum so RAW path is out of scope ?
Otherwise the locking and ordering looks correct to me.
Best regards,
Richard Cheng.
> do {
> int rc;
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cxl/core/mbox.c b/drivers/cxl/core/mbox.c
> index 7c6c5b7450a5..0370ac39ec4a 100644
> --- a/drivers/cxl/core/mbox.c
> +++ b/drivers/cxl/core/mbox.c
> @@ -1516,6 +1516,7 @@ int cxl_mailbox_init(struct cxl_mailbox *cxl_mbox, struct device *host)
>
> cxl_mbox->host = host;
> mutex_init(&cxl_mbox->mbox_mutex);
> + mutex_init(&cxl_mbox->feat_mutex);
> rcuwait_init(&cxl_mbox->mbox_wait);
>
> return 0;
> diff --git a/include/cxl/mailbox.h b/include/cxl/mailbox.h
> index c4e99e2e3a9d..d008b9db07aa 100644
> --- a/include/cxl/mailbox.h
> +++ b/include/cxl/mailbox.h
> @@ -50,6 +50,7 @@ struct cxl_mbox_cmd {
> * @payload_size: Size of space for payload
> * (CXL 3.1 8.2.8.4.3 Mailbox Capabilities Register)
> * @mbox_mutex: mutex protects device mailbox and firmware
> + * @feat_mutex: serializes multi-part Get/Set Feature transfers
> * @mbox_wait: rcuwait for mailbox
> * @mbox_send: @dev specific transport for transmitting mailbox commands
> * @feat_cap: Features capability
> @@ -60,6 +61,7 @@ struct cxl_mailbox {
> DECLARE_BITMAP(exclusive_cmds, CXL_MEM_COMMAND_ID_MAX);
> size_t payload_size;
> struct mutex mbox_mutex; /* lock to protect mailbox context */
> + struct mutex feat_mutex;
> struct rcuwait mbox_wait;
> int (*mbox_send)(struct cxl_mailbox *cxl_mbox, struct cxl_mbox_cmd *cmd);
> enum cxl_features_capability feat_cap;
>
> base-commit: 8cdeaa50eae8dad34885515f62559ee83e7e8dda
> --
> 2.54.0
>
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-13 9:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-09 15:58 [PATCH] cxl/features: Serialize multi-part Get/Set Feature transfers Dave Jiang
2026-07-09 16:08 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-13 9:52 ` Richard Cheng [this message]
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=alS0YGIqRfGBVCWl@MWDK4CY14F \
--to=icheng@nvidia.com \
--cc=alison.schofield@intel.com \
--cc=dave.jiang@intel.com \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=djbw@kernel.org \
--cc=jic23@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vishal.l.verma@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox