From: Charan Teja Kalla <quic_charante@quicinc.com>
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>,
Saravana Kannan <saravanak@google.com>,
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>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] iommu: Handle race with default domain setup
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2025 18:27:14 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2a090f80-e145-410d-8d02-efdaf324c8c9@quicinc.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87bd187fa98a025c9665747fbfe757a8bf249c18.1739486121.git.robin.murphy@arm.com>
Thanks a lot for posting these patches, Robin.
On 2/14/2025 5:18 AM, Robin Murphy wrote:
> drivers/iommu/iommu.c | 5 +++++
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
> index 870c3cdbd0f6..2486f6d6ef68 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
> @@ -3097,6 +3097,11 @@ int iommu_device_use_default_domain(struct device *dev)
> return 0;
>
> mutex_lock(&group->mutex);
> + /* We may race against bus_iommu_probe() finalising groups here */
> + if (!group->default_domain) {
> + ret = -EPROBE_DEFER;
> + goto unlock_out;
> + }
We just hit the issue again even after picking up this patch, though
very hard to reproduce, on 6.6 LTS.
After code inspection, it seems the issue is that - default domain is
setup in the bus_iommu_probe() before hitting of this replay.
A:async client probe in platform_dma_configure(), B:bus_iommu_probe() :-
1) A: sets up iommu_fwspec under iommu_probe_device_lock.
2) B: Sets the dev->iommu_group under iommu_probe_device_lock. Domain
setup is deferred.
3) A: Returns with out allocating the default domain, as
dev->iommu_group is set, whose checks are also made under the same
'iommu_probe_device_lock'. __This miss setting of the valid dev->dma_ops__.
4) B: Sets up the group->default_domain under group->mutex.
5) A: iommu_device_use_default_domain(): Relies on this
group->default_domain, under the same mutex, to decide if need to go for
replay, which is skipped. This is skipping the setting up of valid
dma_ops and that's an issue.
But I don't think that the same issue exists on 6.13 because of your
patch, b67483b3c44e ("iommu/dma: Centralise iommu_setup_dma_ops()").
bus_iommu_probe():
list_for_each_entry_safe(group, next, &group_list, entry) {
mutex_lock(&group->mutex);
for_each_group_device(group, gdev)
iommu_setup_dma_ops(gdev->dev);
mutex_unlock(&group->mutex);
}
This makes the step4 above force to use the valid dma_iommu api, thus I
see no issue when there is no probe deferral.
So, I think we are good with this patch on 6.13.
Now coming back to 6.6 LTS, any ideas you have here, please?
> if (group->owner_cnt) {
> if (group->domain != group->default_domain || group->owner ||
> !xa_empty(&group->pasid_array)) {
Thanks,
Charan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-14 12:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-13 23:48 [PATCH 0/2] iommu: Fix the longstanding probe issues Robin Murphy
2025-02-13 23:48 ` [PATCH 1/2] iommu: Handle race with default domain setup Robin Murphy
2025-02-14 12:57 ` Charan Teja Kalla [this message]
2025-02-17 16:29 ` Robin Murphy
2025-02-14 19:43 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-02-13 23:49 ` [PATCH 2/2] iommu: Get DT/ACPI parsing into the proper probe path Robin Murphy
2025-02-14 17:29 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2025-02-14 20:14 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-02-17 15:00 ` Robin Murphy
2025-02-19 18:29 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-02-19 22:43 ` Rob Herring
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=2a090f80-e145-410d-8d02-efdaf324c8c9@quicinc.com \
--to=quic_charante@quicinc.com \
--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=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=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=saravanak@google.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