From: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@gmail.com>
To: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>
Cc: Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@gmail.com>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>, Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
"linux-leds@vger.kernel.org" <linux-leds@vger.kernel.org>,
"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] leds: trigger: netdev: fix RTNL handling to prevent potential deadlock
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2023 11:13:06 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6f49affe-cbee-4b06-a9e4-ef78937404f7@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231201095455.GS32077@kernel.org>
On 01.12.2023 10:54, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 09:03:56AM +0100, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
>> When working on LED support for r8169 I got the following lockdep
>> warning. Easiest way to prevent this scenario seems to be to take
>> the RTNL lock before the trigger_data lock in set_device_name().
>>
>> ======================================================
>> WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
>> 6.7.0-rc2-next-20231124+ #2 Not tainted
>> ------------------------------------------------------
>> bash/383 is trying to acquire lock:
>> ffff888103aa1c68 (&trigger_data->lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: netdev_trig_notify+0xec/0x190 [ledtrig_netdev]
>>
>> but task is already holding lock:
>> ffffffff8cddf808 (rtnl_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: rtnl_lock+0x12/0x20
>>
>> which lock already depends on the new lock.
>>
>>
>> the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
>>
>> -> #1 (rtnl_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}:
>> __mutex_lock+0x9b/0xb50
>> mutex_lock_nested+0x16/0x20
>> rtnl_lock+0x12/0x20
>> set_device_name+0xa9/0x120 [ledtrig_netdev]
>> netdev_trig_activate+0x1a1/0x230 [ledtrig_netdev]
>> led_trigger_set+0x172/0x2c0
>> led_trigger_write+0xf1/0x140
>> sysfs_kf_bin_write+0x5d/0x80
>> kernfs_fop_write_iter+0x15d/0x210
>> vfs_write+0x1f0/0x510
>> ksys_write+0x6c/0xf0
>> __x64_sys_write+0x14/0x20
>> do_syscall_64+0x3f/0xf0
>> entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x6c/0x74
>>
>> -> #0 (&trigger_data->lock){+.+.}-{3:3}:
>> __lock_acquire+0x1459/0x25a0
>> lock_acquire+0xc8/0x2d0
>> __mutex_lock+0x9b/0xb50
>> mutex_lock_nested+0x16/0x20
>> netdev_trig_notify+0xec/0x190 [ledtrig_netdev]
>> call_netdevice_register_net_notifiers+0x5a/0x100
>> register_netdevice_notifier+0x85/0x120
>> netdev_trig_activate+0x1d4/0x230 [ledtrig_netdev]
>> led_trigger_set+0x172/0x2c0
>> led_trigger_write+0xf1/0x140
>> sysfs_kf_bin_write+0x5d/0x80
>> kernfs_fop_write_iter+0x15d/0x210
>> vfs_write+0x1f0/0x510
>> ksys_write+0x6c/0xf0
>> __x64_sys_write+0x14/0x20
>> do_syscall_64+0x3f/0xf0
>> entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x6c/0x74
>>
>> other info that might help us debug this:
>>
>> Possible unsafe locking scenario:
>>
>> CPU0 CPU1
>> ---- ----
>> lock(rtnl_mutex);
>> lock(&trigger_data->lock);
>> lock(rtnl_mutex);
>> lock(&trigger_data->lock);
>>
>> *** DEADLOCK ***
>>
>> 8 locks held by bash/383:
>> #0: ffff888103ff33f0 (sb_writers#3){.+.+}-{0:0}, at: ksys_write+0x6c/0xf0
>> #1: ffff888103aa1e88 (&of->mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: kernfs_fop_write_iter+0x114/0x210
>> #2: ffff8881036f1890 (kn->active#82){.+.+}-{0:0}, at: kernfs_fop_write_iter+0x11d/0x210
>> #3: ffff888108e2c358 (&led_cdev->led_access){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: led_trigger_write+0x30/0x140
>> #4: ffffffff8cdd9e10 (triggers_list_lock){++++}-{3:3}, at: led_trigger_write+0x75/0x140
>> #5: ffff888108e2c270 (&led_cdev->trigger_lock){++++}-{3:3}, at: led_trigger_write+0xe3/0x140
>> #6: ffffffff8cdde3d0 (pernet_ops_rwsem){++++}-{3:3}, at: register_netdevice_notifier+0x1c/0x120
>> #7: ffffffff8cddf808 (rtnl_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: rtnl_lock+0x12/0x20
>>
>> stack backtrace:
>> CPU: 0 PID: 383 Comm: bash Not tainted 6.7.0-rc2-next-20231124+ #2
>> Hardware name: Default string Default string/Default string, BIOS ADLN.M6.SODIMM.ZB.CY.015 08/08/2023
>> Call Trace:
>> <TASK>
>> dump_stack_lvl+0x5c/0xd0
>> dump_stack+0x10/0x20
>> print_circular_bug+0x2dd/0x410
>> check_noncircular+0x131/0x150
>> __lock_acquire+0x1459/0x25a0
>> lock_acquire+0xc8/0x2d0
>> ? netdev_trig_notify+0xec/0x190 [ledtrig_netdev]
>> __mutex_lock+0x9b/0xb50
>> ? netdev_trig_notify+0xec/0x190 [ledtrig_netdev]
>> ? __this_cpu_preempt_check+0x13/0x20
>> ? netdev_trig_notify+0xec/0x190 [ledtrig_netdev]
>> ? __cancel_work_timer+0x11c/0x1b0
>> ? __mutex_lock+0x123/0xb50
>> mutex_lock_nested+0x16/0x20
>> ? mutex_lock_nested+0x16/0x20
>> netdev_trig_notify+0xec/0x190 [ledtrig_netdev]
>> call_netdevice_register_net_notifiers+0x5a/0x100
>> register_netdevice_notifier+0x85/0x120
>> netdev_trig_activate+0x1d4/0x230 [ledtrig_netdev]
>> led_trigger_set+0x172/0x2c0
>> ? preempt_count_add+0x49/0xc0
>> led_trigger_write+0xf1/0x140
>> sysfs_kf_bin_write+0x5d/0x80
>> kernfs_fop_write_iter+0x15d/0x210
>> vfs_write+0x1f0/0x510
>> ksys_write+0x6c/0xf0
>> __x64_sys_write+0x14/0x20
>> do_syscall_64+0x3f/0xf0
>> entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x6c/0x74
>> RIP: 0033:0x7f269055d034
>> Code: c7 00 16 00 00 00 b8 ff ff ff ff c3 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 f3 0f 1e fa 80 3d 35 c3 0d 00 00 74 13 b8 01 00 00 00 0f 05 <48> 3d 00 f0 ff ff 77 54 c3 0f 1f 00 48 83 ec 28 48 89 54 24 18 48
>> RSP: 002b:00007ffddb7ef748 EFLAGS: 00000202 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000001
>> RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 0000000000000007 RCX: 00007f269055d034
>> RDX: 0000000000000007 RSI: 000055bf5f4af3c0 RDI: 0000000000000001
>> RBP: 000055bf5f4af3c0 R08: 0000000000000073 R09: 0000000000000001
>> R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000202 R12: 0000000000000007
>> R13: 00007f26906325c0 R14: 00007f269062ff20 R15: 0000000000000000
>> </TASK>
>>
>> Fixes: f42c437acc55 ("leds: trigger: netdev: add additional specific link speed mode")
>
> Hi Heiner,
>
> The hash above doesn't seem to match what is upstream.
> Perhaps it should be:
>
Indeed, thanks for the hint.
> Fixes: d5e01266e7f5 ("leds: trigger: netdev: add additional specific link speed mode")
>
>> Signed-off-by: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@gmail.com>
>
> ...
prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-12-01 10:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-11-29 8:03 [PATCH] leds: trigger: netdev: fix RTNL handling to prevent potential deadlock Heiner Kallweit
2023-12-01 9:54 ` Simon Horman
2023-12-01 10:13 ` Heiner Kallweit [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=6f49affe-cbee-4b06-a9e4-ef78937404f7@gmail.com \
--to=hkallweit1@gmail.com \
--cc=andrew@lunn.ch \
--cc=ansuelsmth@gmail.com \
--cc=horms@kernel.org \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=lee@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-leds@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).