Linux PCI subsystem development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Waiman Long" <longman@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] PCI: Call local_pci_probe() directly if current CPU is in the right node
Date: Sun, 07 Jun 2026 22:20:35 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260607222035.E05961F00893@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260607221103.703133-1-longman@redhat.com>

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:

Pre-existing issues:
- [High] Incomplete fix for workqueue recursive locking deadlock hazard due to conflating NUMA affinity optimization with deadlock avoidance.
--

commit 00ce8bc63ea5f4dc858bb9687e393f23de7912a4
Author: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>

PCI: Call local_pci_probe() directly if current CPU is in the right node

This commit attempts to fix a lockdep recursive warning in pci_call_probe()
by directly calling local_pci_probe() when the current task is a kworker
executing on the desired NUMA node.

> --- a/drivers/pci/pci-driver.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/pci-driver.c

[ ... ]

> @@ -376,14 +378,27 @@ static int pci_call_probe(struct pci_driver *drv, struct pci_dev *dev,
>  	 */
>  	node = dev_to_node(&dev->dev);
>  	dev->is_probed = 1;
> +	node_invalid = node < 0 || node >= MAX_NUMNODES || !node_online(node);
> +	node_cpus = node_invalid ? cpu_online_mask : cpumask_of_node(node);
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * If the current task is a wq kworker activated by queue_work_on()
> +	 * below, the kworker is affined to a designated CPU and won't be
> +	 * switched to another one. So the current CPU can be checked to see
> +	 * if it is in the right node.
> +	 */
> +	if (current->flags & PF_WQ_WORKER) {
> +		cpu_in_node = cpumask_test_cpu(get_cpu(), node_cpus);
> +		put_cpu();
> +	}
>  
>  	cpu_hotplug_disable();
>  	/*
>  	 * Prevent nesting work_on_cpu() for the case where a Virtual Function
> -	 * device is probed from work_on_cpu() of the Physical device.
> +	 * device is probed from work_on_cpu() of the Physical device or when
> +	 * the current CPU is in the desired node.
>  	 */
> -	if (node < 0 || node >= MAX_NUMNODES || !node_online(node) ||
> -	    pci_physfn_is_probed(dev)) {
> +	if (node_invalid || cpu_in_node || pci_physfn_is_probed(dev)) {

[Severity: High]
This is a pre-existing issue, but does using NUMA locality as a proxy for
deadlock avoidance provide an incomplete fix for the workqueue recursive
locking hazard?

While this suppresses the lockdep warning for typical setups where a parent
and child share the same NUMA node, what happens if a nested probe occurs
for a device assigned to a different NUMA node?

If cpu_in_node evaluates to false during a cross-node nested probe, it
appears the code will fall through to the else block, queue a new work item
to pci_probe_wq, and call flush_work() on it.

If this nested probe is initiated from a work item already executing on
pci_probe_wq, wouldn't waiting on a new work item queued to the same
workqueue trigger the exact same recursive lockdep warning, and potentially
deadlock if the workqueue's max_active workers are exhausted?

>  		error = local_pci_probe(&ddi);
>  	} else {
>  		struct pci_probe_arg arg = { .ddi = &ddi };

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260607221103.703133-1-longman@redhat.com?part=1

  reply	other threads:[~2026-06-07 22:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-06-07 22:11 [PATCH v3] PCI: Call local_pci_probe() directly if current CPU is in the right node Waiman Long
2026-06-07 22:20 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-06-07 23:55   ` Waiman Long
2026-06-08 19:51 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2026-06-09 17:28   ` Waiman Long

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=20260607222035.E05961F00893@smtp.kernel.org \
    --to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=longman@redhat.com \
    --cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
    /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