From: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
To: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>,
Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com>
Cc: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org
Subject: e1000e pci_disable_link_state_locked() issues
Date: Wed, 20 May 2015 14:47:49 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150520194749.GA10210@google.com> (raw)
I think we have some issues with the e1000e usage of
pci_disable_link_state_locked(), which Yinghai added with 9f728f53dd70
("PCI/e1000e: Add and use pci_disable_link_state_locked()").
That fixed an AER deadlock in the following path, where pci_bus_sem is held
by pci_walk_bus(), and we deadlocked when we tried to re-acquire it in
pci_disable_link_state():
do_recovery
broadcast_error_message(..., report_slot_reset)
pci_walk_bus
down_read(&pci_bus_sem)
cb(...) # report_slot_reset
report_slot_reset
dev->driver->err_handler->slot_reset # e1000_io_slot_reset
e1000_io_slot_reset
e1000e_disable_aspm
pci_disable_link_state
down_read(&pci_bus_sem)
9f728f53dd70 fixed that by changing e1000e_disable_aspm() to use
pci_disable_link_state_locked() instead, which assumes pci_bus_sem is
already held.
That's fine for the e1000_io_slot_reset() path, where pci_bus_sem really
*is* held. But e1000e_disable_aspm() is also called from e1000_probe() and
__e1000_resume(), and in those paths, we *don't* hold pci_bus_sem.
In effect, the caller of pci_disable_link_state_locked() is promising that
pci_bus_sem is held, and __pci_disable_link_state() relies on that promise
for its locking. But e1000e isn't upholding its end of the bargain.
I'm not 100% sure __pci_disable_link_state() actually *needs* that locking:
it is only called from a driver, and it should be impossible for a device
or any upstream bridge to go away while a driver is bound to it. If
somebody wanted to analyze this further and propose a patch to remove the
locking (if it seems safe), that would be great.
But in any case, __pci_disable_link_state() should be able to rely on its
callers following the rules, so I'd like to see an e1000e change to use
pci_disable_link_state() from the paths where pci_bus_sem is not held.
Bjorn
next reply other threads:[~2015-05-20 19:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-05-20 19:47 Bjorn Helgaas [this message]
2015-05-21 15:56 ` [Intel-wired-lan] e1000e pci_disable_link_state_locked() issues Lubetkin, YanirX
2015-05-22 7:14 ` Yijing Wang
2015-05-22 7:55 ` Yijing Wang
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=20150520194749.GA10210@google.com \
--to=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org \
--cc=jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=yinghai@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).