From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
To: Eric Farman <farman@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de>,
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>,
iommu@lists.linux.dev, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>,
Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>,
Chen-Yu Tsai <wenst@chromium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] Fix device_lock deadlock on two probe() paths
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2023 15:15:46 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZN+1UktCwqTu53FI@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bff750f47b326c7c0066f1debc5411a8208a128c.camel@linux.ibm.com>
On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 02:00:21PM -0400, Eric Farman wrote:
> Well, I'm trying to chase down an apparent deadlock in the mdev cases
> that is introduced with the commit [1] blamed by these fixes. Seems
> that when iommu_group_{add|remove}_device gets called out of vfio (for
> example, vfio-ap or -ccw), the device lock is already held so
> attempting to get it again isn't going to go well.
Oh, yes. Thankfully due to all the recent cleanup there is now only
one caller of iommu_group_add_device() - VFIO and only on the
vfio_register_emulated_iommu_dev() path.
All those callers are under mdev probe callbacks so they all must have
the device lock held. iommu_group_remove_device is the same. Simple
fix to just assert the device lock is held.
> I'm puzzled why lockdep isn't shouting over this for me, so I added a
> lockdep_assert_not_held() in those paths to get a proper callchain:
The driver core mostly disables lockdep on the device_lock() :(
Does this work for you?
Thanks,
Jason
diff --git a/drivers/iommu/iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
index 18162049bd2294..1f58bfacb47951 100644
--- a/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
+++ b/drivers/iommu/iommu.c
@@ -1166,12 +1166,11 @@ int iommu_group_add_device(struct iommu_group *group, struct device *dev)
{
struct group_device *gdev;
- device_lock(dev);
+ device_lock_assert(dev);
+
gdev = iommu_group_alloc_device(group, dev);
- if (IS_ERR(gdev)) {
- device_unlock(dev);
+ if (IS_ERR(gdev))
return PTR_ERR(gdev);
- }
iommu_group_ref_get(group);
dev->iommu_group = group;
@@ -1179,7 +1178,6 @@ int iommu_group_add_device(struct iommu_group *group, struct device *dev)
mutex_lock(&group->mutex);
list_add_tail(&gdev->list, &group->devices);
mutex_unlock(&group->mutex);
- device_unlock(dev);
return 0;
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(iommu_group_add_device);
@@ -1195,14 +1193,13 @@ void iommu_group_remove_device(struct device *dev)
{
struct iommu_group *group;
- device_lock(dev);
+ device_lock_assert(dev);
+
group = dev->iommu_group;
if (group) {
dev_info(dev, "Removing from iommu group %d\n", group->id);
__iommu_group_remove_device(dev);
}
- device_unlock(dev);
-
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(iommu_group_remove_device);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-08-18 18:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CGME20230809144403eucas1p1345aec6ec34440f1794594426e0402ab@eucas1p1.samsung.com>
2023-08-09 14:43 ` [PATCH v2 0/4] Fix device_lock deadlock on two probe() paths Jason Gunthorpe
2023-08-09 14:43 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] iommu: Provide iommu_probe_device_locked() Jason Gunthorpe
2023-08-09 14:43 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] iommu: Pass in the iommu_device to probe for in bus_iommu_probe() Jason Gunthorpe
2023-08-09 14:43 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] iommu: Do not attempt to re-lock the iommu device when probing Jason Gunthorpe
2023-08-10 2:37 ` Tian, Kevin
2023-08-09 14:43 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] iommu: dev->iommu->iommu_dev must be set before ops->device_group() Jason Gunthorpe
2023-08-10 2:37 ` Tian, Kevin
2023-08-09 15:49 ` [PATCH v2 0/4] Fix device_lock deadlock on two probe() paths Joerg Roedel
2023-08-09 15:55 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-08-10 16:15 ` Jeffrey Hugo
2023-08-17 8:31 ` Marek Szyprowski
2023-08-17 18:33 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-08-18 15:56 ` Joerg Roedel
2023-08-18 16:06 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-08-18 18:00 ` Eric Farman
2023-08-18 18:15 ` Jason Gunthorpe [this message]
2023-08-18 18:32 ` Eric Farman
2023-08-18 18:24 ` Joerg Roedel
2023-08-18 18:50 ` Robin Murphy
2023-08-18 19:19 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2023-08-21 11:35 ` Robin Murphy
2023-08-18 19:18 ` Jason Gunthorpe
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=ZN+1UktCwqTu53FI@nvidia.com \
--to=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=baolu.lu@linux.intel.com \
--cc=farman@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=jroedel@suse.de \
--cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=m.szyprowski@samsung.com \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=wenst@chromium.org \
--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