* Re: [core-for-CI][PATCH] iommu: Remove iova cpu hotplugging flushing
[not found] ` <3185079.N7aMVyhfb1@jkrzyszt-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com>
@ 2022-10-05 14:26 ` Thorsten Leemhuis
2022-10-05 15:25 ` Guenter Roeck
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Thorsten Leemhuis @ 2022-10-05 14:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Fenghua Yu
Cc: intel-gfx, Chris Wilson, Joerg Roedel, Will Deacon, iommu,
linux-kernel, regressions, Janusz Krzysztofik, Lucas De Marchi,
Robin Murphy, linux-hwmon
[adding the coretemp maintainer (Fenghua Yu) and the appropriate mailing
list to the list of recipients, as there apparently is a coretemp bug
that results in a iommu change causing a regression]
On 30.09.22 18:57, Janusz Krzysztofik wrote:
> I think this issue can hit any user with a platform that loads iommu and
> coretemp drivers. Adding regressions@lists.linux.dev to the loop.
f598a497bc7d was merged for 5.13-rc1, which is quite a while ago, so at
least a quick revert is out of question as it might do more harm than
good. The authors of the commit are kinda responsible for fixing
situations like this; but well, did anybody ask the developers of the
coretemp driver kindly if they are aware of the problem and maybe even
willing to fix it? Doesn't look like it from here from search lore (hope
I didn't miss anything), so let's give it a try.
Ciao, Thorsten
> On Thursday, 22 September 2022 14:09:35 CEST Robin Murphy wrote:
>> On 22/09/2022 11:10 am, Janusz Krzysztofik wrote:
>>> From: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
>>>
>>> Manual revert of commit f598a497bc7d ("iova: Add CPU hotplug handler to
>>> flush rcaches"). It is trying to instantiate a cpuhp notifier from inside
>>> a cpuhp callback. That code replaced intel_iommu implementation of
>>> flushing per-IOVA domain CPU rcaches which used a single instance of cpuhp
>>> held for the module lifetime.
>>
>> OK, *now* I see what's going on. It doesn't seem unreasonable to me for
>> bus notifiers to touch CPU hotplug - what seems more unexpected is the
>> coretemp driver creating and adding a platform device from inside a
>> hotplug callback.
>>
>> Once we start trying to revert multiple unrelated bits of important
>> functionality from other subsystems because one driver is doing a weird
>> thing, maybe it's time to instead question whether that driver should be
>> doing a weird thing?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Robin.
>>
>>> <4>[ 6.928112] ======================================================
>>> <4>[ 6.928621] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
>>> <4>[ 6.929225] 6.0.0-rc6-CI_DRM_12164-ga1f63e144e54+ #1 Not tainted
>>> <4>[ 6.929818] ------------------------------------------------------
>>> <4>[ 6.930415] cpuhp/0/15 is trying to acquire lock:
>>> <4>[ 6.931011] ffff888100e02a78 (&(&priv->bus_notifier)->rwsem){++++}-
> {3:3}, at: blocking_notifier_call_chain+0x20/0x50
>>> <4>[ 6.931533]
>>> but task is already holding lock:
>>> <4>[ 6.931534] ffffffff826490c0 (cpuhp_state-up){+.+.}-{0:0}, at:
> cpuhp_thread_fun+0x48/0x1f0
>>> <4>[ 6.933069]
>>> which lock already depends on the new lock.
>>>
>>> <4>[ 6.933070]
>>> the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
>>> <4>[ 6.933071]
>>> -> #2 (cpuhp_state-up){+.+.}-{0:0}:
>>> <4>[ 6.933076] lock_acquire+0xd3/0x310
>>> <4>[ 6.933079] cpuhp_thread_fun+0xa6/0x1f0
>>> <4>[ 6.933082] smpboot_thread_fn+0x1b5/0x260
>>> <4>[ 6.933084] kthread+0xed/0x120
>>> <4>[ 6.933086] ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30
>>> <4>[ 6.933089]
>>> -> #1 (cpu_hotplug_lock){++++}-{0:0}:
>>> <4>[ 6.933092] lock_acquire+0xd3/0x310
>>> <4>[ 6.933094] __cpuhp_state_add_instance+0x43/0x1c0
>>> <4>[ 6.933096] iova_domain_init_rcaches+0x199/0x1c0
>>> <4>[ 6.933099] iommu_setup_dma_ops+0x104/0x3d0
>>> <4>[ 6.933101] iommu_probe_device+0xa4/0x180
>>> <4>[ 6.933103] iommu_bus_notifier+0x2d/0x40
>>> <4>[ 6.933105] notifier_call_chain+0x31/0x90
>>> <4>[ 6.933108] blocking_notifier_call_chain+0x3a/0x50
>>> <4>[ 6.933110] device_add+0x3c1/0x900
>>> <4>[ 6.933112] pci_device_add+0x255/0x580
>>> <4>[ 6.933115] pci_scan_single_device+0xa6/0xd0
>>> <4>[ 6.933117] p2sb_bar+0x7f/0x220
>>> <4>[ 6.933120] i801_add_tco_spt.isra.18+0x2b/0xca [i2c_i801]
>>> <4>[ 6.933124] i801_add_tco+0xb1/0xfe [i2c_i801]
>>> <4>[ 6.933126] i801_probe.cold.25+0xa9/0x3a7 [i2c_i801]
>>> <4>[ 6.933129] pci_device_probe+0x95/0x110
>>> <4>[ 6.933132] really_probe+0xd6/0x350
>>> <4>[ 6.933134] __driver_probe_device+0x73/0x170
>>> <4>[ 6.933137] driver_probe_device+0x1a/0x90
>>> <4>[ 6.933140] __driver_attach+0xbc/0x190
>>> <4>[ 6.933141] bus_for_each_dev+0x72/0xc0
>>> <4>[ 6.933143] bus_add_driver+0x1bb/0x210
>>> <4>[ 6.933146] driver_register+0x66/0xc0
>>> <4>[ 6.933147] wmi_bmof_probe+0x3b/0xac [wmi_bmof]
>>> <4>[ 6.933150] do_one_initcall+0x53/0x2f0
>>> <4>[ 6.933152] do_init_module+0x45/0x1c0
>>> <4>[ 6.933154] load_module+0x1cd5/0x1ec0
>>> <4>[ 6.933156] __do_sys_finit_module+0xaf/0x120
>>> <4>[ 6.933158] do_syscall_64+0x37/0x90
>>> <4>[ 6.933160] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd
>>> <4>[ 6.953757]
>>> -> #0 (&(&priv->bus_notifier)->rwsem){++++}-{3:3}:
>>> <4>[ 6.953779] validate_chain+0xb3f/0x2000
>>> <4>[ 6.953785] __lock_acquire+0x5a4/0xb70
>>> <4>[ 6.953786] lock_acquire+0xd3/0x310
>>> <4>[ 6.953787] down_read+0x39/0x140
>>> <4>[ 6.953790] blocking_notifier_call_chain+0x20/0x50
>>> <4>[ 6.953794] device_add+0x3c1/0x900
>>> <4>[ 6.953797] platform_device_add+0x108/0x240
>>> <4>[ 6.953799] coretemp_cpu_online+0xe1/0x15e [coretemp]
>>> <4>[ 6.953805] cpuhp_invoke_callback+0x181/0x8a0
>>> <4>[ 6.958244] cpuhp_thread_fun+0x188/0x1f0
>>> <4>[ 6.958267] smpboot_thread_fn+0x1b5/0x260
>>> <4>[ 6.958270] kthread+0xed/0x120
>>> <4>[ 6.958272] ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30
>>> <4>[ 6.958274]
>>> other info that might help us debug this:
>>>
>>> <4>[ 6.958275] Chain exists of:
>>> &(&priv->bus_notifier)->rwsem --> cpu_hotplug_lock --
>> cpuhp_state-up
>>>
>>> <4>[ 6.961037] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
>>>
>>> <4>[ 6.961038] CPU0 CPU1
>>> <4>[ 6.961038] ---- ----
>>> <4>[ 6.961039] lock(cpuhp_state-up);
>>> <4>[ 6.961040] lock(cpu_hotplug_lock);
>>> <4>[ 6.961041] lock(cpuhp_state-up);
>>> <4>[ 6.961042] lock(&(&priv->bus_notifier)->rwsem);
>>> <4>[ 6.961044]
>>> *** DEADLOCK ***
>>>
>>> <4>[ 6.961044] 2 locks held by cpuhp/0/15:
>>> <4>[ 6.961046] #0: ffffffff82648f10 (cpu_hotplug_lock){++++}-{0:0},
> at: cpuhp_thread_fun+0x48/0x1f0
>>> <4>[ 6.961053] #1: ffffffff826490c0 (cpuhp_state-up){+.+.}-{0:0}, at:
> cpuhp_thread_fun+0x48/0x1f0
>>> <4>[ 6.961058]
>>> stack backtrace:
>>> <4>[ 6.961059] CPU: 0 PID: 15 Comm: cpuhp/0 Not tainted 6.0.0-rc6-
> CI_DRM_12164-ga1f63e144e54+ #1
>>> <4>[ 6.961062] Hardware name: Intel Corporation NUC8i7HVK/NUC8i7HVB,
> BIOS HNKBLi70.86A.0047.2018.0718.1706 07/18/2018
>>> <4>[ 6.961063] Call Trace:
>>> <4>[ 6.961064] <TASK>
>>> <4>[ 6.961065] dump_stack_lvl+0x56/0x7f
>>> <4>[ 6.961069] check_noncircular+0x132/0x150
>>> <4>[ 6.961078] validate_chain+0xb3f/0x2000
>>> <4>[ 6.961083] __lock_acquire+0x5a4/0xb70
>>> <4>[ 6.961087] lock_acquire+0xd3/0x310
>>> <4>[ 6.961088] ? blocking_notifier_call_chain+0x20/0x50
>>> <4>[ 6.961093] down_read+0x39/0x140
>>> <4>[ 6.961097] ? blocking_notifier_call_chain+0x20/0x50
>>> <4>[ 6.961099] blocking_notifier_call_chain+0x20/0x50
>>> <4>[ 6.961102] device_add+0x3c1/0x900
>>> <4>[ 6.961106] ? dev_set_name+0x4e/0x70
>>> <4>[ 6.961109] platform_device_add+0x108/0x240
>>> <4>[ 6.961112] coretemp_cpu_online+0xe1/0x15e [coretemp]
>>> <4>[ 6.961117] ? create_core_data+0x550/0x550 [coretemp]
>>> <4>[ 6.961120] cpuhp_invoke_callback+0x181/0x8a0
>>> <4>[ 6.961124] cpuhp_thread_fun+0x188/0x1f0
>>> <4>[ 6.961129] ? smpboot_thread_fn+0x1e/0x260
>>> <4>[ 6.961131] smpboot_thread_fn+0x1b5/0x260
>>> <4>[ 6.961134] ? sort_range+0x20/0x20
>>> <4>[ 6.961135] kthread+0xed/0x120
>>> <4>[ 6.961137] ? kthread_complete_and_exit+0x20/0x20
>>> <4>[ 6.961139] ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30
>>> <4>[ 6.961145] </TASK>
>>>
>>> Closes: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/6641
>>> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
>>> Signed-off-by: Janusz Krzysztofik <janusz.krzysztofik@linux.intel.com>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/iommu/iova.c | 28 ----------------------------
>>> include/linux/cpuhotplug.h | 1 -
>>> include/linux/iova.h | 1 -
>>> 3 files changed, 30 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/iova.c b/drivers/iommu/iova.c
>>> index 47d1983dfa2a4..f0136d0231f06 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/iommu/iova.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/iova.c
>>> @@ -31,16 +31,6 @@ unsigned long iova_rcache_range(void)
>>> return PAGE_SIZE << (IOVA_RANGE_CACHE_MAX_SIZE - 1);
>>> }
>>>
>>> -static int iova_cpuhp_dead(unsigned int cpu, struct hlist_node *node)
>>> -{
>>> - struct iova_domain *iovad;
>>> -
>>> - iovad = hlist_entry_safe(node, struct iova_domain, cpuhp_dead);
>>> -
>>> - free_cpu_cached_iovas(cpu, iovad);
>>> - return 0;
>>> -}
>>> -
>>> static void free_global_cached_iovas(struct iova_domain *iovad);
>>>
>>> static struct iova *to_iova(struct rb_node *node)
>>> @@ -255,21 +245,10 @@ int iova_cache_get(void)
>>> {
>>> mutex_lock(&iova_cache_mutex);
>>> if (!iova_cache_users) {
>>> - int ret;
>>> -
>>> - ret = cpuhp_setup_state_multi(CPUHP_IOMMU_IOVA_DEAD,
> "iommu/iova:dead", NULL,
>>> - iova_cpuhp_dead);
>>> - if (ret) {
>>> - mutex_unlock(&iova_cache_mutex);
>>> - pr_err("Couldn't register cpuhp handler\n");
>>> - return ret;
>>> - }
>>> -
>>> iova_cache = kmem_cache_create(
>>> "iommu_iova", sizeof(struct iova), 0,
>>> SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN, NULL);
>>> if (!iova_cache) {
>>> -
> cpuhp_remove_multi_state(CPUHP_IOMMU_IOVA_DEAD);
>>> mutex_unlock(&iova_cache_mutex);
>>> pr_err("Couldn't create iova cache\n");
>>> return -ENOMEM;
>>> @@ -292,7 +271,6 @@ void iova_cache_put(void)
>>> }
>>> iova_cache_users--;
>>> if (!iova_cache_users) {
>>> - cpuhp_remove_multi_state(CPUHP_IOMMU_IOVA_DEAD);
>>> kmem_cache_destroy(iova_cache);
>>> }
>>> mutex_unlock(&iova_cache_mutex);
>>> @@ -495,8 +473,6 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(free_iova_fast);
>>>
>>> static void iova_domain_free_rcaches(struct iova_domain *iovad)
>>> {
>>> - cpuhp_state_remove_instance_nocalls(CPUHP_IOMMU_IOVA_DEAD,
>>> - &iovad-
>> cpuhp_dead);
>>> free_iova_rcaches(iovad);
>>> }
>>>
>>> @@ -755,10 +731,6 @@ int iova_domain_init_rcaches(struct iova_domain
> *iovad)
>>> }
>>> }
>>>
>>> - ret = cpuhp_state_add_instance_nocalls(CPUHP_IOMMU_IOVA_DEAD,
>>> - &iovad-
>> cpuhp_dead);
>>> - if (ret)
>>> - goto out_err;
>>> return 0;
>>>
>>> out_err:
>>> diff --git a/include/linux/cpuhotplug.h b/include/linux/cpuhotplug.h
>>> index f61447913db97..8f541a6b63e41 100644
>>> --- a/include/linux/cpuhotplug.h
>>> +++ b/include/linux/cpuhotplug.h
>>> @@ -95,7 +95,6 @@ enum cpuhp_state {
>>> CPUHP_PAGE_ALLOC,
>>> CPUHP_NET_DEV_DEAD,
>>> CPUHP_PCI_XGENE_DEAD,
>>> - CPUHP_IOMMU_IOVA_DEAD,
>>> CPUHP_LUSTRE_CFS_DEAD,
>>> CPUHP_AP_ARM_CACHE_B15_RAC_DEAD,
>>> CPUHP_PADATA_DEAD,
>>> diff --git a/include/linux/iova.h b/include/linux/iova.h
>>> index c6ba6d95d79c2..fd77cd5bfa333 100644
>>> --- a/include/linux/iova.h
>>> +++ b/include/linux/iova.h
>>> @@ -37,7 +37,6 @@ struct iova_domain {
>>> struct iova anchor; /* rbtree lookup anchor
> */
>>>
>>> struct iova_rcache *rcaches;
>>> - struct hlist_node cpuhp_dead;
>>> };
>>>
>>> static inline unsigned long iova_size(struct iova *iova)
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [core-for-CI][PATCH] iommu: Remove iova cpu hotplugging flushing
2022-10-05 14:26 ` [core-for-CI][PATCH] iommu: Remove iova cpu hotplugging flushing Thorsten Leemhuis
@ 2022-10-05 15:25 ` Guenter Roeck
2022-10-05 16:15 ` Robin Murphy
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Guenter Roeck @ 2022-10-05 15:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thorsten Leemhuis
Cc: Fenghua Yu, intel-gfx, Chris Wilson, Joerg Roedel, Will Deacon,
iommu, linux-kernel, regressions, Janusz Krzysztofik,
Lucas De Marchi, Robin Murphy, linux-hwmon
On Wed, Oct 05, 2022 at 04:26:28PM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> [adding the coretemp maintainer (Fenghua Yu) and the appropriate mailing
> list to the list of recipients, as there apparently is a coretemp bug
> that results in a iommu change causing a regression]
>
> On 30.09.22 18:57, Janusz Krzysztofik wrote:
> > I think this issue can hit any user with a platform that loads iommu and
> > coretemp drivers. Adding regressions@lists.linux.dev to the loop.
>
> f598a497bc7d was merged for 5.13-rc1, which is quite a while ago, so at
> least a quick revert is out of question as it might do more harm than
> good. The authors of the commit are kinda responsible for fixing
> situations like this; but well, did anybody ask the developers of the
> coretemp driver kindly if they are aware of the problem and maybe even
> willing to fix it? Doesn't look like it from here from search lore (hope
> I didn't miss anything), so let's give it a try.
>
> Ciao, Thorsten
>
> > On Thursday, 22 September 2022 14:09:35 CEST Robin Murphy wrote:
> >> On 22/09/2022 11:10 am, Janusz Krzysztofik wrote:
> >>> From: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> >>>
> >>> Manual revert of commit f598a497bc7d ("iova: Add CPU hotplug handler to
> >>> flush rcaches"). It is trying to instantiate a cpuhp notifier from inside
> >>> a cpuhp callback. That code replaced intel_iommu implementation of
> >>> flushing per-IOVA domain CPU rcaches which used a single instance of cpuhp
> >>> held for the module lifetime.
> >>
> >> OK, *now* I see what's going on. It doesn't seem unreasonable to me for
> >> bus notifiers to touch CPU hotplug - what seems more unexpected is the
> >> coretemp driver creating and adding a platform device from inside a
> >> hotplug callback.
It is only unexpected if it is documented that creating a platform driver
from a hotplug callback is off limits.
> >>
> >> Once we start trying to revert multiple unrelated bits of important
> >> functionality from other subsystems because one driver is doing a weird
> >> thing, maybe it's time to instead question whether that driver should be
> >> doing a weird thing?
That isn't the point. This _used_ to work, after all. Maybe the functionality
introduced with f598a497bc7d is important, but there is still a regression
introduced by f598a497bc7d. Sure, maybe the coretemp driver is doing
"a weird thing", but if some generic code is changed causing something to fail
that previously worked, it is still a regression and the reponsibility of the
person or team making the generic code change to fix the problems caused by
that change.
Guenter
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Robin.
> >>
> >>> <4>[ 6.928112] ======================================================
> >>> <4>[ 6.928621] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
> >>> <4>[ 6.929225] 6.0.0-rc6-CI_DRM_12164-ga1f63e144e54+ #1 Not tainted
> >>> <4>[ 6.929818] ------------------------------------------------------
> >>> <4>[ 6.930415] cpuhp/0/15 is trying to acquire lock:
> >>> <4>[ 6.931011] ffff888100e02a78 (&(&priv->bus_notifier)->rwsem){++++}-
> > {3:3}, at: blocking_notifier_call_chain+0x20/0x50
> >>> <4>[ 6.931533]
> >>> but task is already holding lock:
> >>> <4>[ 6.931534] ffffffff826490c0 (cpuhp_state-up){+.+.}-{0:0}, at:
> > cpuhp_thread_fun+0x48/0x1f0
> >>> <4>[ 6.933069]
> >>> which lock already depends on the new lock.
> >>>
> >>> <4>[ 6.933070]
> >>> the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
> >>> <4>[ 6.933071]
> >>> -> #2 (cpuhp_state-up){+.+.}-{0:0}:
> >>> <4>[ 6.933076] lock_acquire+0xd3/0x310
> >>> <4>[ 6.933079] cpuhp_thread_fun+0xa6/0x1f0
> >>> <4>[ 6.933082] smpboot_thread_fn+0x1b5/0x260
> >>> <4>[ 6.933084] kthread+0xed/0x120
> >>> <4>[ 6.933086] ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30
> >>> <4>[ 6.933089]
> >>> -> #1 (cpu_hotplug_lock){++++}-{0:0}:
> >>> <4>[ 6.933092] lock_acquire+0xd3/0x310
> >>> <4>[ 6.933094] __cpuhp_state_add_instance+0x43/0x1c0
> >>> <4>[ 6.933096] iova_domain_init_rcaches+0x199/0x1c0
> >>> <4>[ 6.933099] iommu_setup_dma_ops+0x104/0x3d0
> >>> <4>[ 6.933101] iommu_probe_device+0xa4/0x180
> >>> <4>[ 6.933103] iommu_bus_notifier+0x2d/0x40
> >>> <4>[ 6.933105] notifier_call_chain+0x31/0x90
> >>> <4>[ 6.933108] blocking_notifier_call_chain+0x3a/0x50
> >>> <4>[ 6.933110] device_add+0x3c1/0x900
> >>> <4>[ 6.933112] pci_device_add+0x255/0x580
> >>> <4>[ 6.933115] pci_scan_single_device+0xa6/0xd0
> >>> <4>[ 6.933117] p2sb_bar+0x7f/0x220
> >>> <4>[ 6.933120] i801_add_tco_spt.isra.18+0x2b/0xca [i2c_i801]
> >>> <4>[ 6.933124] i801_add_tco+0xb1/0xfe [i2c_i801]
> >>> <4>[ 6.933126] i801_probe.cold.25+0xa9/0x3a7 [i2c_i801]
> >>> <4>[ 6.933129] pci_device_probe+0x95/0x110
> >>> <4>[ 6.933132] really_probe+0xd6/0x350
> >>> <4>[ 6.933134] __driver_probe_device+0x73/0x170
> >>> <4>[ 6.933137] driver_probe_device+0x1a/0x90
> >>> <4>[ 6.933140] __driver_attach+0xbc/0x190
> >>> <4>[ 6.933141] bus_for_each_dev+0x72/0xc0
> >>> <4>[ 6.933143] bus_add_driver+0x1bb/0x210
> >>> <4>[ 6.933146] driver_register+0x66/0xc0
> >>> <4>[ 6.933147] wmi_bmof_probe+0x3b/0xac [wmi_bmof]
> >>> <4>[ 6.933150] do_one_initcall+0x53/0x2f0
> >>> <4>[ 6.933152] do_init_module+0x45/0x1c0
> >>> <4>[ 6.933154] load_module+0x1cd5/0x1ec0
> >>> <4>[ 6.933156] __do_sys_finit_module+0xaf/0x120
> >>> <4>[ 6.933158] do_syscall_64+0x37/0x90
> >>> <4>[ 6.933160] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd
> >>> <4>[ 6.953757]
> >>> -> #0 (&(&priv->bus_notifier)->rwsem){++++}-{3:3}:
> >>> <4>[ 6.953779] validate_chain+0xb3f/0x2000
> >>> <4>[ 6.953785] __lock_acquire+0x5a4/0xb70
> >>> <4>[ 6.953786] lock_acquire+0xd3/0x310
> >>> <4>[ 6.953787] down_read+0x39/0x140
> >>> <4>[ 6.953790] blocking_notifier_call_chain+0x20/0x50
> >>> <4>[ 6.953794] device_add+0x3c1/0x900
> >>> <4>[ 6.953797] platform_device_add+0x108/0x240
> >>> <4>[ 6.953799] coretemp_cpu_online+0xe1/0x15e [coretemp]
> >>> <4>[ 6.953805] cpuhp_invoke_callback+0x181/0x8a0
> >>> <4>[ 6.958244] cpuhp_thread_fun+0x188/0x1f0
> >>> <4>[ 6.958267] smpboot_thread_fn+0x1b5/0x260
> >>> <4>[ 6.958270] kthread+0xed/0x120
> >>> <4>[ 6.958272] ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30
> >>> <4>[ 6.958274]
> >>> other info that might help us debug this:
> >>>
> >>> <4>[ 6.958275] Chain exists of:
> >>> &(&priv->bus_notifier)->rwsem --> cpu_hotplug_lock --
> >> cpuhp_state-up
> >>>
> >>> <4>[ 6.961037] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
> >>>
> >>> <4>[ 6.961038] CPU0 CPU1
> >>> <4>[ 6.961038] ---- ----
> >>> <4>[ 6.961039] lock(cpuhp_state-up);
> >>> <4>[ 6.961040] lock(cpu_hotplug_lock);
> >>> <4>[ 6.961041] lock(cpuhp_state-up);
> >>> <4>[ 6.961042] lock(&(&priv->bus_notifier)->rwsem);
> >>> <4>[ 6.961044]
> >>> *** DEADLOCK ***
> >>>
> >>> <4>[ 6.961044] 2 locks held by cpuhp/0/15:
> >>> <4>[ 6.961046] #0: ffffffff82648f10 (cpu_hotplug_lock){++++}-{0:0},
> > at: cpuhp_thread_fun+0x48/0x1f0
> >>> <4>[ 6.961053] #1: ffffffff826490c0 (cpuhp_state-up){+.+.}-{0:0}, at:
> > cpuhp_thread_fun+0x48/0x1f0
> >>> <4>[ 6.961058]
> >>> stack backtrace:
> >>> <4>[ 6.961059] CPU: 0 PID: 15 Comm: cpuhp/0 Not tainted 6.0.0-rc6-
> > CI_DRM_12164-ga1f63e144e54+ #1
> >>> <4>[ 6.961062] Hardware name: Intel Corporation NUC8i7HVK/NUC8i7HVB,
> > BIOS HNKBLi70.86A.0047.2018.0718.1706 07/18/2018
> >>> <4>[ 6.961063] Call Trace:
> >>> <4>[ 6.961064] <TASK>
> >>> <4>[ 6.961065] dump_stack_lvl+0x56/0x7f
> >>> <4>[ 6.961069] check_noncircular+0x132/0x150
> >>> <4>[ 6.961078] validate_chain+0xb3f/0x2000
> >>> <4>[ 6.961083] __lock_acquire+0x5a4/0xb70
> >>> <4>[ 6.961087] lock_acquire+0xd3/0x310
> >>> <4>[ 6.961088] ? blocking_notifier_call_chain+0x20/0x50
> >>> <4>[ 6.961093] down_read+0x39/0x140
> >>> <4>[ 6.961097] ? blocking_notifier_call_chain+0x20/0x50
> >>> <4>[ 6.961099] blocking_notifier_call_chain+0x20/0x50
> >>> <4>[ 6.961102] device_add+0x3c1/0x900
> >>> <4>[ 6.961106] ? dev_set_name+0x4e/0x70
> >>> <4>[ 6.961109] platform_device_add+0x108/0x240
> >>> <4>[ 6.961112] coretemp_cpu_online+0xe1/0x15e [coretemp]
> >>> <4>[ 6.961117] ? create_core_data+0x550/0x550 [coretemp]
> >>> <4>[ 6.961120] cpuhp_invoke_callback+0x181/0x8a0
> >>> <4>[ 6.961124] cpuhp_thread_fun+0x188/0x1f0
> >>> <4>[ 6.961129] ? smpboot_thread_fn+0x1e/0x260
> >>> <4>[ 6.961131] smpboot_thread_fn+0x1b5/0x260
> >>> <4>[ 6.961134] ? sort_range+0x20/0x20
> >>> <4>[ 6.961135] kthread+0xed/0x120
> >>> <4>[ 6.961137] ? kthread_complete_and_exit+0x20/0x20
> >>> <4>[ 6.961139] ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30
> >>> <4>[ 6.961145] </TASK>
> >>>
> >>> Closes: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/6641
> >>> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Janusz Krzysztofik <janusz.krzysztofik@linux.intel.com>
> >>> ---
> >>> drivers/iommu/iova.c | 28 ----------------------------
> >>> include/linux/cpuhotplug.h | 1 -
> >>> include/linux/iova.h | 1 -
> >>> 3 files changed, 30 deletions(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/iova.c b/drivers/iommu/iova.c
> >>> index 47d1983dfa2a4..f0136d0231f06 100644
> >>> --- a/drivers/iommu/iova.c
> >>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/iova.c
> >>> @@ -31,16 +31,6 @@ unsigned long iova_rcache_range(void)
> >>> return PAGE_SIZE << (IOVA_RANGE_CACHE_MAX_SIZE - 1);
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> -static int iova_cpuhp_dead(unsigned int cpu, struct hlist_node *node)
> >>> -{
> >>> - struct iova_domain *iovad;
> >>> -
> >>> - iovad = hlist_entry_safe(node, struct iova_domain, cpuhp_dead);
> >>> -
> >>> - free_cpu_cached_iovas(cpu, iovad);
> >>> - return 0;
> >>> -}
> >>> -
> >>> static void free_global_cached_iovas(struct iova_domain *iovad);
> >>>
> >>> static struct iova *to_iova(struct rb_node *node)
> >>> @@ -255,21 +245,10 @@ int iova_cache_get(void)
> >>> {
> >>> mutex_lock(&iova_cache_mutex);
> >>> if (!iova_cache_users) {
> >>> - int ret;
> >>> -
> >>> - ret = cpuhp_setup_state_multi(CPUHP_IOMMU_IOVA_DEAD,
> > "iommu/iova:dead", NULL,
> >>> - iova_cpuhp_dead);
> >>> - if (ret) {
> >>> - mutex_unlock(&iova_cache_mutex);
> >>> - pr_err("Couldn't register cpuhp handler\n");
> >>> - return ret;
> >>> - }
> >>> -
> >>> iova_cache = kmem_cache_create(
> >>> "iommu_iova", sizeof(struct iova), 0,
> >>> SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN, NULL);
> >>> if (!iova_cache) {
> >>> -
> > cpuhp_remove_multi_state(CPUHP_IOMMU_IOVA_DEAD);
> >>> mutex_unlock(&iova_cache_mutex);
> >>> pr_err("Couldn't create iova cache\n");
> >>> return -ENOMEM;
> >>> @@ -292,7 +271,6 @@ void iova_cache_put(void)
> >>> }
> >>> iova_cache_users--;
> >>> if (!iova_cache_users) {
> >>> - cpuhp_remove_multi_state(CPUHP_IOMMU_IOVA_DEAD);
> >>> kmem_cache_destroy(iova_cache);
> >>> }
> >>> mutex_unlock(&iova_cache_mutex);
> >>> @@ -495,8 +473,6 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(free_iova_fast);
> >>>
> >>> static void iova_domain_free_rcaches(struct iova_domain *iovad)
> >>> {
> >>> - cpuhp_state_remove_instance_nocalls(CPUHP_IOMMU_IOVA_DEAD,
> >>> - &iovad-
> >> cpuhp_dead);
> >>> free_iova_rcaches(iovad);
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> @@ -755,10 +731,6 @@ int iova_domain_init_rcaches(struct iova_domain
> > *iovad)
> >>> }
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> - ret = cpuhp_state_add_instance_nocalls(CPUHP_IOMMU_IOVA_DEAD,
> >>> - &iovad-
> >> cpuhp_dead);
> >>> - if (ret)
> >>> - goto out_err;
> >>> return 0;
> >>>
> >>> out_err:
> >>> diff --git a/include/linux/cpuhotplug.h b/include/linux/cpuhotplug.h
> >>> index f61447913db97..8f541a6b63e41 100644
> >>> --- a/include/linux/cpuhotplug.h
> >>> +++ b/include/linux/cpuhotplug.h
> >>> @@ -95,7 +95,6 @@ enum cpuhp_state {
> >>> CPUHP_PAGE_ALLOC,
> >>> CPUHP_NET_DEV_DEAD,
> >>> CPUHP_PCI_XGENE_DEAD,
> >>> - CPUHP_IOMMU_IOVA_DEAD,
> >>> CPUHP_LUSTRE_CFS_DEAD,
> >>> CPUHP_AP_ARM_CACHE_B15_RAC_DEAD,
> >>> CPUHP_PADATA_DEAD,
> >>> diff --git a/include/linux/iova.h b/include/linux/iova.h
> >>> index c6ba6d95d79c2..fd77cd5bfa333 100644
> >>> --- a/include/linux/iova.h
> >>> +++ b/include/linux/iova.h
> >>> @@ -37,7 +37,6 @@ struct iova_domain {
> >>> struct iova anchor; /* rbtree lookup anchor
> > */
> >>>
> >>> struct iova_rcache *rcaches;
> >>> - struct hlist_node cpuhp_dead;
> >>> };
> >>>
> >>> static inline unsigned long iova_size(struct iova *iova)
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [core-for-CI][PATCH] iommu: Remove iova cpu hotplugging flushing
2022-10-05 15:25 ` Guenter Roeck
@ 2022-10-05 16:15 ` Robin Murphy
2022-10-05 17:11 ` Guenter Roeck
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Robin Murphy @ 2022-10-05 16:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Guenter Roeck, Thorsten Leemhuis
Cc: Fenghua Yu, intel-gfx, Chris Wilson, Joerg Roedel, Will Deacon,
iommu, linux-kernel, regressions, Janusz Krzysztofik,
Lucas De Marchi, linux-hwmon
On 2022-10-05 16:25, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 05, 2022 at 04:26:28PM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>> [adding the coretemp maintainer (Fenghua Yu) and the appropriate mailing
>> list to the list of recipients, as there apparently is a coretemp bug
>> that results in a iommu change causing a regression]
>>
>> On 30.09.22 18:57, Janusz Krzysztofik wrote:
>>> I think this issue can hit any user with a platform that loads iommu and
>>> coretemp drivers. Adding regressions@lists.linux.dev to the loop.
>>
>> f598a497bc7d was merged for 5.13-rc1, which is quite a while ago, so at
>> least a quick revert is out of question as it might do more harm than
>> good. The authors of the commit are kinda responsible for fixing
>> situations like this; but well, did anybody ask the developers of the
>> coretemp driver kindly if they are aware of the problem and maybe even
>> willing to fix it? Doesn't look like it from here from search lore (hope
>> I didn't miss anything), so let's give it a try.
>>
>> Ciao, Thorsten
>>
>>> On Thursday, 22 September 2022 14:09:35 CEST Robin Murphy wrote:
>>>> On 22/09/2022 11:10 am, Janusz Krzysztofik wrote:
>>>>> From: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
>>>>>
>>>>> Manual revert of commit f598a497bc7d ("iova: Add CPU hotplug handler to
>>>>> flush rcaches"). It is trying to instantiate a cpuhp notifier from inside
>>>>> a cpuhp callback. That code replaced intel_iommu implementation of
>>>>> flushing per-IOVA domain CPU rcaches which used a single instance of cpuhp
>>>>> held for the module lifetime.
>>>>
>>>> OK, *now* I see what's going on. It doesn't seem unreasonable to me for
>>>> bus notifiers to touch CPU hotplug - what seems more unexpected is the
>>>> coretemp driver creating and adding a platform device from inside a
>>>> hotplug callback.
>
> It is only unexpected if it is documented that creating a platform driver
> from a hotplug callback is off limits.
>
>>>>
>>>> Once we start trying to revert multiple unrelated bits of important
>>>> functionality from other subsystems because one driver is doing a weird
>>>> thing, maybe it's time to instead question whether that driver should be
>>>> doing a weird thing?
>
> That isn't the point. This _used_ to work, after all. Maybe the functionality
> introduced with f598a497bc7d is important, but there is still a regression
> introduced by f598a497bc7d. Sure, maybe the coretemp driver is doing
> "a weird thing", but if some generic code is changed causing something to fail
> that previously worked, it is still a regression and the reponsibility of the
> person or team making the generic code change to fix the problems caused by
> that change.
Note that AFAICS I don't think anything's actually broken, and this is
merely a lockdep false-positive. The coretemp device itself will not be
associated with the IOMMU, so the IOMMU notifier will never get as far
as taking any further locks in that particular instance.
Of course I *can* try writing the patch to fix things properly if I have
to, but fair warning; I'm not familiar with this driver or the relevant
hardware or the subsystem, and from a brief look it will involve some
significant redesign that I have every chance of getting wrong. Plus I'm
not sure I can test the hotplug stuff at all since the x86 box I have to
hand only seems to have a single coretemp device.
The fact is, the wacky thing it's doing with platform_device_add()
doesn't actually work *all* that well anyway:
$ sudo rmmod coretemp
$ echo 0 | sudo tee /sys/bus/platform/drivers_autoprobe
0
$ sudo modprobe coretemp
[7169271.187103] BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address:
0000000000000418
[7169271.187127] #PF: supervisor write access in kernel mode
[7169271.187131] #PF: error_code(0x0002) - not-present page
[7169271.187134] PGD 0 P4D 0
[7169271.187139] Oops: 0002 [#1] SMP PTI
[7169271.187144] CPU: 0 PID: 16 Comm: cpuhp/0 Not tainted
5.13.0-52-generic #59~20.04.1-Ubuntu
[7169271.187150] Hardware name: LENOVO 30B6S08J03/1030, BIOS S01KT29A
06/20/2016
[7169271.187152] RIP: 0010:create_core_data+0x3cb/0x510 [coretemp]
[7169271.187163] Code: 44 89 e7 e8 67 99 7f c8 85 c0 75 17 0f b6 45 b9
41 83 46 24 01 69 c0 18 fc ff ff 41 03 46 08 41 89 46 04 48 8b 45 b0 4c
63 fb <4e> 89 b4 f8 10 04 00 00 48 8b 00 41 8b 56 24 48 89 45 a0 85 d2 7e
[7169271.187167] RSP: 0018:ffffa5ddc015fd98 EFLAGS: 00010203
[7169271.187172] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: 0000000000000001 RCX:
0000000000000002
[7169271.187175] RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: ffffffff89207b30 RDI:
ffffa5ddc015fd40
[7169271.187178] RBP: ffffa5ddc015fe00 R08: 0000000000000000 R09:
ffff8e049c04c800
[7169271.187181] R10: 0000000000019460 R11: 0000000000000000 R12:
0000000000000000
[7169271.187184] R13: 000000000000005f R14: ffff8e049c04c800 R15:
0000000000000001
[7169271.187187] FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff8e0b5f600000(0000)
knlGS:0000000000000000
[7169271.187191] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
[7169271.187194] CR2: 0000000000000418 CR3: 0000000190672002 CR4:
00000000003706f0
[7169271.187198] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2:
0000000000000000
[7169271.187200] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7:
0000000000000400
[7169271.187203] Call Trace:
[7169271.187206] <TASK>
[7169271.187212] coretemp_cpu_online+0x14f/0x180 [coretemp]
[7169271.187220] ? create_core_data+0x510/0x510 [coretemp]
[7169271.187226] cpuhp_invoke_callback+0x10b/0x430
[7169271.187237] cpuhp_thread_fun+0x92/0x150
[7169271.187244] smpboot_thread_fn+0xd0/0x170
[7169271.187253] ? sort_range+0x30/0x30
[7169271.187260] kthread+0x12b/0x150
[7169271.187264] ? set_kthread_struct+0x40/0x40
[7169271.187269] ret_from_fork+0x22/0x30
[7169271.187280] </TASK>
Consider that a bug report, unless of course it's documented somewhere
that users aren't allowed to turn off autoprobe ;)
Thanks,
Robin.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [core-for-CI][PATCH] iommu: Remove iova cpu hotplugging flushing
2022-10-05 16:15 ` Robin Murphy
@ 2022-10-05 17:11 ` Guenter Roeck
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Guenter Roeck @ 2022-10-05 17:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Robin Murphy
Cc: Thorsten Leemhuis, Fenghua Yu, intel-gfx, Chris Wilson,
Joerg Roedel, Will Deacon, iommu, linux-kernel, regressions,
Janusz Krzysztofik, Lucas De Marchi, linux-hwmon
On Wed, Oct 05, 2022 at 05:15:49PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
> On 2022-10-05 16:25, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 05, 2022 at 04:26:28PM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> > > [adding the coretemp maintainer (Fenghua Yu) and the appropriate mailing
> > > list to the list of recipients, as there apparently is a coretemp bug
> > > that results in a iommu change causing a regression]
> > >
> > > On 30.09.22 18:57, Janusz Krzysztofik wrote:
> > > > I think this issue can hit any user with a platform that loads iommu and
> > > > coretemp drivers. Adding regressions@lists.linux.dev to the loop.
> > >
> > > f598a497bc7d was merged for 5.13-rc1, which is quite a while ago, so at
> > > least a quick revert is out of question as it might do more harm than
> > > good. The authors of the commit are kinda responsible for fixing
> > > situations like this; but well, did anybody ask the developers of the
> > > coretemp driver kindly if they are aware of the problem and maybe even
> > > willing to fix it? Doesn't look like it from here from search lore (hope
> > > I didn't miss anything), so let's give it a try.
> > >
> > > Ciao, Thorsten
> > >
> > > > On Thursday, 22 September 2022 14:09:35 CEST Robin Murphy wrote:
> > > > > On 22/09/2022 11:10 am, Janusz Krzysztofik wrote:
> > > > > > From: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Manual revert of commit f598a497bc7d ("iova: Add CPU hotplug handler to
> > > > > > flush rcaches"). It is trying to instantiate a cpuhp notifier from inside
> > > > > > a cpuhp callback. That code replaced intel_iommu implementation of
> > > > > > flushing per-IOVA domain CPU rcaches which used a single instance of cpuhp
> > > > > > held for the module lifetime.
> > > > >
> > > > > OK, *now* I see what's going on. It doesn't seem unreasonable to me for
> > > > > bus notifiers to touch CPU hotplug - what seems more unexpected is the
> > > > > coretemp driver creating and adding a platform device from inside a
> > > > > hotplug callback.
> >
> > It is only unexpected if it is documented that creating a platform driver
> > from a hotplug callback is off limits.
> >
> > > > >
> > > > > Once we start trying to revert multiple unrelated bits of important
> > > > > functionality from other subsystems because one driver is doing a weird
> > > > > thing, maybe it's time to instead question whether that driver should be
> > > > > doing a weird thing?
> >
> > That isn't the point. This _used_ to work, after all. Maybe the functionality
> > introduced with f598a497bc7d is important, but there is still a regression
> > introduced by f598a497bc7d. Sure, maybe the coretemp driver is doing
> > "a weird thing", but if some generic code is changed causing something to fail
> > that previously worked, it is still a regression and the reponsibility of the
> > person or team making the generic code change to fix the problems caused by
> > that change.
>
> Note that AFAICS I don't think anything's actually broken, and this is
> merely a lockdep false-positive. The coretemp device itself will not be
> associated with the IOMMU, so the IOMMU notifier will never get as far as
> taking any further locks in that particular instance.
>
> Of course I *can* try writing the patch to fix things properly if I have to,
> but fair warning; I'm not familiar with this driver or the relevant hardware
> or the subsystem, and from a brief look it will involve some significant
> redesign that I have every chance of getting wrong. Plus I'm not sure I can
> test the hotplug stuff at all since the x86 box I have to hand only seems to
> have a single coretemp device.
>
> The fact is, the wacky thing it's doing with platform_device_add() doesn't
> actually work *all* that well anyway:
>
Hah, yes, that is obviously a bug. Unfortunately I don't have any systems
with Intel CPU left, so I can not test myself. FWIW, on v5.18.x (which is
what Google laptops use for whatever reason), I don't see the crash, but
"modprobe -r coretemp" followed by "modprobe coretemp" doesn't work -
the driver loads, but does not register with the hwmon subsystem.
There has been no relevant change to the driver since v5.13, so all
I can conclude at this point is that the driver is very likely still
broken in the mainline kernel.
Guenter
> $ sudo rmmod coretemp
> $ echo 0 | sudo tee /sys/bus/platform/drivers_autoprobe
> 0
> $ sudo modprobe coretemp
>
> [7169271.187103] BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address:
> 0000000000000418
> [7169271.187127] #PF: supervisor write access in kernel mode
> [7169271.187131] #PF: error_code(0x0002) - not-present page
> [7169271.187134] PGD 0 P4D 0
> [7169271.187139] Oops: 0002 [#1] SMP PTI
> [7169271.187144] CPU: 0 PID: 16 Comm: cpuhp/0 Not tainted 5.13.0-52-generic
> #59~20.04.1-Ubuntu
> [7169271.187150] Hardware name: LENOVO 30B6S08J03/1030, BIOS S01KT29A
> 06/20/2016
> [7169271.187152] RIP: 0010:create_core_data+0x3cb/0x510 [coretemp]
> [7169271.187163] Code: 44 89 e7 e8 67 99 7f c8 85 c0 75 17 0f b6 45 b9 41 83
> 46 24 01 69 c0 18 fc ff ff 41 03 46 08 41 89 46 04 48 8b 45 b0 4c 63 fb <4e>
> 89 b4 f8 10 04 00 00 48 8b 00 41 8b 56 24 48 89 45 a0 85 d2 7e
> [7169271.187167] RSP: 0018:ffffa5ddc015fd98 EFLAGS: 00010203
> [7169271.187172] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: 0000000000000001 RCX:
> 0000000000000002
> [7169271.187175] RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: ffffffff89207b30 RDI:
> ffffa5ddc015fd40
> [7169271.187178] RBP: ffffa5ddc015fe00 R08: 0000000000000000 R09:
> ffff8e049c04c800
> [7169271.187181] R10: 0000000000019460 R11: 0000000000000000 R12:
> 0000000000000000
> [7169271.187184] R13: 000000000000005f R14: ffff8e049c04c800 R15:
> 0000000000000001
> [7169271.187187] FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff8e0b5f600000(0000)
> knlGS:0000000000000000
> [7169271.187191] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
> [7169271.187194] CR2: 0000000000000418 CR3: 0000000190672002 CR4:
> 00000000003706f0
> [7169271.187198] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2:
> 0000000000000000
> [7169271.187200] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7:
> 0000000000000400
> [7169271.187203] Call Trace:
> [7169271.187206] <TASK>
> [7169271.187212] coretemp_cpu_online+0x14f/0x180 [coretemp]
> [7169271.187220] ? create_core_data+0x510/0x510 [coretemp]
> [7169271.187226] cpuhp_invoke_callback+0x10b/0x430
> [7169271.187237] cpuhp_thread_fun+0x92/0x150
> [7169271.187244] smpboot_thread_fn+0xd0/0x170
> [7169271.187253] ? sort_range+0x30/0x30
> [7169271.187260] kthread+0x12b/0x150
> [7169271.187264] ? set_kthread_struct+0x40/0x40
> [7169271.187269] ret_from_fork+0x22/0x30
> [7169271.187280] </TASK>
>
> Consider that a bug report, unless of course it's documented somewhere that
> users aren't allowed to turn off autoprobe ;)
>
> Thanks,
> Robin.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2022-10-05 17:11 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <20220922101036.87457-1-janusz.krzysztofik@linux.intel.com>
[not found] ` <1f4899d2-52ed-ae94-f681-3953c82b4799@arm.com>
[not found] ` <3185079.N7aMVyhfb1@jkrzyszt-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com>
2022-10-05 14:26 ` [core-for-CI][PATCH] iommu: Remove iova cpu hotplugging flushing Thorsten Leemhuis
2022-10-05 15:25 ` Guenter Roeck
2022-10-05 16:15 ` Robin Murphy
2022-10-05 17:11 ` Guenter Roeck
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox