* [PATCHv5 1/2] RDMA/rxe: Fix a dead lock problem
@ 2022-04-17 2:43 yanjun.zhu
2022-04-17 2:43 ` [PATCHv2 2/2] RDMA/rxe: Use different xa locks on different path yanjun.zhu
2022-04-20 6:42 ` [PATCHv5 1/2] RDMA/rxe: Fix a dead lock problem Leon Romanovsky
0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: yanjun.zhu @ 2022-04-17 2:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: jgg, leon, linux-rdma, yanjun.zhu; +Cc: Yi Zhang
From: Zhu Yanjun <yanjun.zhu@linux.dev>
This is a dead lock problem.
The ah_pool xa_lock first is acquired in this:
{SOFTIRQ-ON-W} state was registered at:
lock_acquire+0x1d2/0x5a0
_raw_spin_lock+0x33/0x80
__rxe_add_to_pool+0x183/0x230 [rdma_rxe]
Then ah_pool xa_lock is acquired in this:
{IN-SOFTIRQ-W}:
Call Trace:
<TASK>
dump_stack_lvl+0x44/0x57
mark_lock.part.52.cold.79+0x3c/0x46
__lock_acquire+0x1565/0x34a0
lock_acquire+0x1d2/0x5a0
_raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x42/0x90
rxe_pool_get_index+0x72/0x1d0 [rdma_rxe]
rxe_get_av+0x168/0x2a0 [rdma_rxe]
</TASK>
From the above, in the function __rxe_add_to_pool,
xa_lock is acquired. Then the function __rxe_add_to_pool
is interrupted by softirq. The function
rxe_pool_get_index will also acquire xa_lock.
Finally, the dead lock appears.
[ 296.806097] CPU0
[ 296.808550] ----
[ 296.811003] lock(&xa->xa_lock#15); <----- __rxe_add_to_pool
[ 296.814583] <Interrupt>
[ 296.817209] lock(&xa->xa_lock#15); <---- rxe_pool_get_index
[ 296.820961]
*** DEADLOCK ***
Fixes: 3225717f6dfa ("RDMA/rxe: Replace red-black trees by carrays")
Reported-and-tested-by: Yi Zhang <yi.zhang@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Zhu Yanjun <yanjun.zhu@linux.dev>
---
V4->V5: Commit logs are changed to avoid confusion.
V3->V4: xa_lock_irq locks are used.
V2->V3: __rxe_add_to_pool is between spin_lock and spin_unlock, so
GFP_ATOMIC is used in __rxe_add_to_pool.
V1->V2: Replace GFP_KERNEL with GFP_ATOMIC
---
drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_pool.c | 20 ++++++++++++++------
1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_pool.c b/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_pool.c
index 87066d04ed18..f1f06dc7e64f 100644
--- a/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_pool.c
+++ b/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_pool.c
@@ -106,7 +106,7 @@ void rxe_pool_init(struct rxe_dev *rxe, struct rxe_pool *pool,
atomic_set(&pool->num_elem, 0);
- xa_init_flags(&pool->xa, XA_FLAGS_ALLOC);
+ xa_init_flags(&pool->xa, XA_FLAGS_ALLOC | XA_FLAGS_LOCK_IRQ);
pool->limit.min = info->min_index;
pool->limit.max = info->max_index;
}
@@ -138,8 +138,10 @@ void *rxe_alloc(struct rxe_pool *pool)
elem->obj = obj;
kref_init(&elem->ref_cnt);
- err = xa_alloc_cyclic(&pool->xa, &elem->index, elem, pool->limit,
- &pool->next, GFP_KERNEL);
+ xa_lock_irq(&pool->xa);
+ err = __xa_alloc_cyclic(&pool->xa, &elem->index, elem, pool->limit,
+ &pool->next, GFP_KERNEL);
+ xa_unlock_irq(&pool->xa);
if (err)
goto err_free;
@@ -155,6 +157,7 @@ void *rxe_alloc(struct rxe_pool *pool)
int __rxe_add_to_pool(struct rxe_pool *pool, struct rxe_pool_elem *elem)
{
int err;
+ unsigned long flags;
if (WARN_ON(pool->flags & RXE_POOL_ALLOC))
return -EINVAL;
@@ -166,8 +169,10 @@ int __rxe_add_to_pool(struct rxe_pool *pool, struct rxe_pool_elem *elem)
elem->obj = (u8 *)elem - pool->elem_offset;
kref_init(&elem->ref_cnt);
- err = xa_alloc_cyclic(&pool->xa, &elem->index, elem, pool->limit,
- &pool->next, GFP_KERNEL);
+ xa_lock_irqsave(&pool->xa, flags);
+ err = __xa_alloc_cyclic(&pool->xa, &elem->index, elem, pool->limit,
+ &pool->next, GFP_ATOMIC);
+ xa_unlock_irqrestore(&pool->xa, flags);
if (err)
goto err_cnt;
@@ -200,8 +205,11 @@ static void rxe_elem_release(struct kref *kref)
{
struct rxe_pool_elem *elem = container_of(kref, typeof(*elem), ref_cnt);
struct rxe_pool *pool = elem->pool;
+ unsigned long flags;
- xa_erase(&pool->xa, elem->index);
+ xa_lock_irqsave(&pool->xa, flags);
+ __xa_erase(&pool->xa, elem->index);
+ xa_unlock_irqrestore(&pool->xa, flags);
if (pool->cleanup)
pool->cleanup(elem);
--
2.27.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [PATCHv2 2/2] RDMA/rxe: Use different xa locks on different path
2022-04-17 2:43 [PATCHv5 1/2] RDMA/rxe: Fix a dead lock problem yanjun.zhu
@ 2022-04-17 2:43 ` yanjun.zhu
2022-04-20 16:34 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-20 6:42 ` [PATCHv5 1/2] RDMA/rxe: Fix a dead lock problem Leon Romanovsky
1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: yanjun.zhu @ 2022-04-17 2:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: jgg, leon, linux-rdma, yanjun.zhu
From: Zhu Yanjun <yanjun.zhu@linux.dev>
The function __rxe_add_to_pool is called on different path, and the
requirement of the locks is different. The function rxe_create_ah
requires xa_lock_irqsave/irqrestore while others only require xa_lock_irq.
Signed-off-by: Zhu Yanjun <yanjun.zhu@linux.dev>
---
V1->V2: Use pool type instead of gfp_t;
---
drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_pool.c | 18 +++++++++++++-----
1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_pool.c b/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_pool.c
index f1f06dc7e64f..5b097d6666eb 100644
--- a/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_pool.c
+++ b/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_pool.c
@@ -157,7 +157,6 @@ void *rxe_alloc(struct rxe_pool *pool)
int __rxe_add_to_pool(struct rxe_pool *pool, struct rxe_pool_elem *elem)
{
int err;
- unsigned long flags;
if (WARN_ON(pool->flags & RXE_POOL_ALLOC))
return -EINVAL;
@@ -169,10 +168,19 @@ int __rxe_add_to_pool(struct rxe_pool *pool, struct rxe_pool_elem *elem)
elem->obj = (u8 *)elem - pool->elem_offset;
kref_init(&elem->ref_cnt);
- xa_lock_irqsave(&pool->xa, flags);
- err = __xa_alloc_cyclic(&pool->xa, &elem->index, elem, pool->limit,
- &pool->next, GFP_ATOMIC);
- xa_unlock_irqrestore(&pool->xa, flags);
+ if (pool->type == RXE_TYPE_AH) {
+ unsigned long flags;
+
+ xa_lock_irqsave(&pool->xa, flags);
+ err = __xa_alloc_cyclic(&pool->xa, &elem->index, elem, pool->limit,
+ &pool->next, GFP_ATOMIC);
+ xa_unlock_irqrestore(&pool->xa, flags);
+ } else {
+ xa_lock_irq(&pool->xa);
+ err = __xa_alloc_cyclic(&pool->xa, &elem->index, elem, pool->limit,
+ &pool->next, GFP_KERNEL);
+ xa_unlock_irq(&pool->xa);
+ }
if (err)
goto err_cnt;
--
2.27.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCHv5 1/2] RDMA/rxe: Fix a dead lock problem
2022-04-17 2:43 [PATCHv5 1/2] RDMA/rxe: Fix a dead lock problem yanjun.zhu
2022-04-17 2:43 ` [PATCHv2 2/2] RDMA/rxe: Use different xa locks on different path yanjun.zhu
@ 2022-04-20 6:42 ` Leon Romanovsky
2022-04-20 16:32 ` Jason Gunthorpe
1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Leon Romanovsky @ 2022-04-20 6:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: yanjun.zhu; +Cc: jgg, linux-rdma, Yi Zhang
On Sat, Apr 16, 2022 at 10:43:42PM -0400, yanjun.zhu@linux.dev wrote:
> From: Zhu Yanjun <yanjun.zhu@linux.dev>
>
> This is a dead lock problem.
> The ah_pool xa_lock first is acquired in this:
>
> {SOFTIRQ-ON-W} state was registered at:
>
> lock_acquire+0x1d2/0x5a0
> _raw_spin_lock+0x33/0x80
> __rxe_add_to_pool+0x183/0x230 [rdma_rxe]
>
> Then ah_pool xa_lock is acquired in this:
>
> {IN-SOFTIRQ-W}:
>
> Call Trace:
> <TASK>
> dump_stack_lvl+0x44/0x57
> mark_lock.part.52.cold.79+0x3c/0x46
> __lock_acquire+0x1565/0x34a0
> lock_acquire+0x1d2/0x5a0
> _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x42/0x90
> rxe_pool_get_index+0x72/0x1d0 [rdma_rxe]
> rxe_get_av+0x168/0x2a0 [rdma_rxe]
> </TASK>
>
> From the above, in the function __rxe_add_to_pool,
> xa_lock is acquired. Then the function __rxe_add_to_pool
> is interrupted by softirq. The function
> rxe_pool_get_index will also acquire xa_lock.
>
> Finally, the dead lock appears.
>
> [ 296.806097] CPU0
> [ 296.808550] ----
> [ 296.811003] lock(&xa->xa_lock#15); <----- __rxe_add_to_pool
> [ 296.814583] <Interrupt>
> [ 296.817209] lock(&xa->xa_lock#15); <---- rxe_pool_get_index
> [ 296.820961]
> *** DEADLOCK ***
>
> Fixes: 3225717f6dfa ("RDMA/rxe: Replace red-black trees by carrays")
> Reported-and-tested-by: Yi Zhang <yi.zhang@redhat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Zhu Yanjun <yanjun.zhu@linux.dev>
> ---
> V4->V5: Commit logs are changed to avoid confusion.
> V3->V4: xa_lock_irq locks are used.
> V2->V3: __rxe_add_to_pool is between spin_lock and spin_unlock, so
> GFP_ATOMIC is used in __rxe_add_to_pool.
> V1->V2: Replace GFP_KERNEL with GFP_ATOMIC
> ---
> drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_pool.c | 20 ++++++++++++++------
> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_pool.c b/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_pool.c
> index 87066d04ed18..f1f06dc7e64f 100644
> --- a/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_pool.c
> +++ b/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_pool.c
> @@ -106,7 +106,7 @@ void rxe_pool_init(struct rxe_dev *rxe, struct rxe_pool *pool,
>
> atomic_set(&pool->num_elem, 0);
>
> - xa_init_flags(&pool->xa, XA_FLAGS_ALLOC);
> + xa_init_flags(&pool->xa, XA_FLAGS_ALLOC | XA_FLAGS_LOCK_IRQ);
> pool->limit.min = info->min_index;
> pool->limit.max = info->max_index;
> }
> @@ -138,8 +138,10 @@ void *rxe_alloc(struct rxe_pool *pool)
> elem->obj = obj;
> kref_init(&elem->ref_cnt);
>
> - err = xa_alloc_cyclic(&pool->xa, &elem->index, elem, pool->limit,
> - &pool->next, GFP_KERNEL);
> + xa_lock_irq(&pool->xa);
> + err = __xa_alloc_cyclic(&pool->xa, &elem->index, elem, pool->limit,
> + &pool->next, GFP_KERNEL);
> + xa_unlock_irq(&pool->xa);
I may admit that I didn't follow your previous discussions, so maybe you
already explained it. But why do you need xa_lock_irq() here?
Thanks
> if (err)
> goto err_free;
>
> @@ -155,6 +157,7 @@ void *rxe_alloc(struct rxe_pool *pool)
> int __rxe_add_to_pool(struct rxe_pool *pool, struct rxe_pool_elem *elem)
> {
> int err;
> + unsigned long flags;
>
> if (WARN_ON(pool->flags & RXE_POOL_ALLOC))
> return -EINVAL;
> @@ -166,8 +169,10 @@ int __rxe_add_to_pool(struct rxe_pool *pool, struct rxe_pool_elem *elem)
> elem->obj = (u8 *)elem - pool->elem_offset;
> kref_init(&elem->ref_cnt);
>
> - err = xa_alloc_cyclic(&pool->xa, &elem->index, elem, pool->limit,
> - &pool->next, GFP_KERNEL);
> + xa_lock_irqsave(&pool->xa, flags);
> + err = __xa_alloc_cyclic(&pool->xa, &elem->index, elem, pool->limit,
> + &pool->next, GFP_ATOMIC);
> + xa_unlock_irqrestore(&pool->xa, flags);
> if (err)
> goto err_cnt;
>
> @@ -200,8 +205,11 @@ static void rxe_elem_release(struct kref *kref)
> {
> struct rxe_pool_elem *elem = container_of(kref, typeof(*elem), ref_cnt);
> struct rxe_pool *pool = elem->pool;
> + unsigned long flags;
>
> - xa_erase(&pool->xa, elem->index);
> + xa_lock_irqsave(&pool->xa, flags);
> + __xa_erase(&pool->xa, elem->index);
> + xa_unlock_irqrestore(&pool->xa, flags);
>
> if (pool->cleanup)
> pool->cleanup(elem);
> --
> 2.27.0
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCHv5 1/2] RDMA/rxe: Fix a dead lock problem
2022-04-20 6:42 ` [PATCHv5 1/2] RDMA/rxe: Fix a dead lock problem Leon Romanovsky
@ 2022-04-20 16:32 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-21 12:49 ` Yanjun Zhu
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Jason Gunthorpe @ 2022-04-20 16:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Leon Romanovsky; +Cc: yanjun.zhu, linux-rdma, Yi Zhang
On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 09:42:23AM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 16, 2022 at 10:43:42PM -0400, yanjun.zhu@linux.dev wrote:
> > From: Zhu Yanjun <yanjun.zhu@linux.dev>
> >
> > This is a dead lock problem.
> > The ah_pool xa_lock first is acquired in this:
> >
> > {SOFTIRQ-ON-W} state was registered at:
> >
> > lock_acquire+0x1d2/0x5a0
> > _raw_spin_lock+0x33/0x80
> > __rxe_add_to_pool+0x183/0x230 [rdma_rxe]
> >
> > Then ah_pool xa_lock is acquired in this:
> >
> > {IN-SOFTIRQ-W}:
> >
> > Call Trace:
> > <TASK>
> > dump_stack_lvl+0x44/0x57
> > mark_lock.part.52.cold.79+0x3c/0x46
> > __lock_acquire+0x1565/0x34a0
> > lock_acquire+0x1d2/0x5a0
> > _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x42/0x90
> > rxe_pool_get_index+0x72/0x1d0 [rdma_rxe]
> > rxe_get_av+0x168/0x2a0 [rdma_rxe]
> > </TASK>
> >
> > From the above, in the function __rxe_add_to_pool,
> > xa_lock is acquired. Then the function __rxe_add_to_pool
> > is interrupted by softirq. The function
> > rxe_pool_get_index will also acquire xa_lock.
> >
> > Finally, the dead lock appears.
> >
> > [ 296.806097] CPU0
> > [ 296.808550] ----
> > [ 296.811003] lock(&xa->xa_lock#15); <----- __rxe_add_to_pool
> > [ 296.814583] <Interrupt>
> > [ 296.817209] lock(&xa->xa_lock#15); <---- rxe_pool_get_index
> > [ 296.820961]
> > *** DEADLOCK ***
> >
> > Fixes: 3225717f6dfa ("RDMA/rxe: Replace red-black trees by carrays")
> > Reported-and-tested-by: Yi Zhang <yi.zhang@redhat.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Zhu Yanjun <yanjun.zhu@linux.dev>
> > V4->V5: Commit logs are changed to avoid confusion.
> > V3->V4: xa_lock_irq locks are used.
> > V2->V3: __rxe_add_to_pool is between spin_lock and spin_unlock, so
> > GFP_ATOMIC is used in __rxe_add_to_pool.
> > V1->V2: Replace GFP_KERNEL with GFP_ATOMIC
> > drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_pool.c | 20 ++++++++++++++------
> > 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_pool.c b/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_pool.c
> > index 87066d04ed18..f1f06dc7e64f 100644
> > +++ b/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_pool.c
> > @@ -106,7 +106,7 @@ void rxe_pool_init(struct rxe_dev *rxe, struct rxe_pool *pool,
> >
> > atomic_set(&pool->num_elem, 0);
> >
> > - xa_init_flags(&pool->xa, XA_FLAGS_ALLOC);
> > + xa_init_flags(&pool->xa, XA_FLAGS_ALLOC | XA_FLAGS_LOCK_IRQ);
> > pool->limit.min = info->min_index;
> > pool->limit.max = info->max_index;
> > }
> > @@ -138,8 +138,10 @@ void *rxe_alloc(struct rxe_pool *pool)
> > elem->obj = obj;
> > kref_init(&elem->ref_cnt);
> >
> > - err = xa_alloc_cyclic(&pool->xa, &elem->index, elem, pool->limit,
> > - &pool->next, GFP_KERNEL);
> > + xa_lock_irq(&pool->xa);
> > + err = __xa_alloc_cyclic(&pool->xa, &elem->index, elem, pool->limit,
> > + &pool->next, GFP_KERNEL);
> > + xa_unlock_irq(&pool->xa);
It should just use xa_alloc_cyclic_irq() and xa_erase_irq(). Don't
open code the lock.
> I may admit that I didn't follow your previous discussions, so maybe you
> already explained it. But why do you need xa_lock_irq() here?
The spinlock type needs to be consistent in all users.
You can only use the naked version if the spinlock is always obtained
from a process context.
You can only use bh version if the spinlock is always obtained from a
process context or bh/softirq
You can always use the irq version
What I don't understand is why IRQ and not BH? AFAIK there is no case
where rxe is called from a real IRQ, right? Or is it because you can't
nest BH under the IRQ spinlock from CM?
Jason
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCHv2 2/2] RDMA/rxe: Use different xa locks on different path
2022-04-17 2:43 ` [PATCHv2 2/2] RDMA/rxe: Use different xa locks on different path yanjun.zhu
@ 2022-04-20 16:34 ` Jason Gunthorpe
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Jason Gunthorpe @ 2022-04-20 16:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: yanjun.zhu; +Cc: leon, linux-rdma
On Sat, Apr 16, 2022 at 10:43:43PM -0400, yanjun.zhu@linux.dev wrote:
> From: Zhu Yanjun <yanjun.zhu@linux.dev>
>
> The function __rxe_add_to_pool is called on different path, and the
> requirement of the locks is different. The function rxe_create_ah
> requires xa_lock_irqsave/irqrestore while others only require xa_lock_irq.
>
> Signed-off-by: Zhu Yanjun <yanjun.zhu@linux.dev>
> V1->V2: Use pool type instead of gfp_t;
> drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_pool.c | 18 +++++++++++++-----
> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_pool.c b/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_pool.c
> index f1f06dc7e64f..5b097d6666eb 100644
> +++ b/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_pool.c
> @@ -157,7 +157,6 @@ void *rxe_alloc(struct rxe_pool *pool)
> int __rxe_add_to_pool(struct rxe_pool *pool, struct rxe_pool_elem *elem)
> {
> int err;
> - unsigned long flags;
>
> if (WARN_ON(pool->flags & RXE_POOL_ALLOC))
> return -EINVAL;
> @@ -169,10 +168,19 @@ int __rxe_add_to_pool(struct rxe_pool *pool, struct rxe_pool_elem *elem)
> elem->obj = (u8 *)elem - pool->elem_offset;
> kref_init(&elem->ref_cnt);
>
> - xa_lock_irqsave(&pool->xa, flags);
> - err = __xa_alloc_cyclic(&pool->xa, &elem->index, elem, pool->limit,
> - &pool->next, GFP_ATOMIC);
> - xa_unlock_irqrestore(&pool->xa, flags);
> + if (pool->type == RXE_TYPE_AH) {
> + unsigned long flags;
> +
> + xa_lock_irqsave(&pool->xa, flags);
> + err = __xa_alloc_cyclic(&pool->xa, &elem->index, elem, pool->limit,
> + &pool->next, GFP_ATOMIC);
> + xa_unlock_irqrestore(&pool->xa, flags);
This is still not right - you have to test RDMA_CREATE_AH_SLEEPABLE
for the AH path as well.
Jason
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCHv5 1/2] RDMA/rxe: Fix a dead lock problem
2022-04-20 16:32 ` Jason Gunthorpe
@ 2022-04-21 12:49 ` Yanjun Zhu
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Yanjun Zhu @ 2022-04-21 12:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jason Gunthorpe, Leon Romanovsky; +Cc: yanjun.zhu, linux-rdma, Yi Zhang
在 2022/4/21 0:32, Jason Gunthorpe 写道:
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 09:42:23AM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
>> On Sat, Apr 16, 2022 at 10:43:42PM -0400, yanjun.zhu@linux.dev wrote:
>>> From: Zhu Yanjun <yanjun.zhu@linux.dev>
>>>
>>> This is a dead lock problem.
>>> The ah_pool xa_lock first is acquired in this:
>>>
>>> {SOFTIRQ-ON-W} state was registered at:
>>>
>>> lock_acquire+0x1d2/0x5a0
>>> _raw_spin_lock+0x33/0x80
>>> __rxe_add_to_pool+0x183/0x230 [rdma_rxe]
>>>
>>> Then ah_pool xa_lock is acquired in this:
>>>
>>> {IN-SOFTIRQ-W}:
>>>
>>> Call Trace:
>>> <TASK>
>>> dump_stack_lvl+0x44/0x57
>>> mark_lock.part.52.cold.79+0x3c/0x46
>>> __lock_acquire+0x1565/0x34a0
>>> lock_acquire+0x1d2/0x5a0
>>> _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x42/0x90
>>> rxe_pool_get_index+0x72/0x1d0 [rdma_rxe]
>>> rxe_get_av+0x168/0x2a0 [rdma_rxe]
>>> </TASK>
>>>
>>> From the above, in the function __rxe_add_to_pool,
>>> xa_lock is acquired. Then the function __rxe_add_to_pool
>>> is interrupted by softirq. The function
>>> rxe_pool_get_index will also acquire xa_lock.
>>>
>>> Finally, the dead lock appears.
>>>
>>> [ 296.806097] CPU0
>>> [ 296.808550] ----
>>> [ 296.811003] lock(&xa->xa_lock#15); <----- __rxe_add_to_pool
>>> [ 296.814583] <Interrupt>
>>> [ 296.817209] lock(&xa->xa_lock#15); <---- rxe_pool_get_index
>>> [ 296.820961]
>>> *** DEADLOCK ***
>>>
>>> Fixes: 3225717f6dfa ("RDMA/rxe: Replace red-black trees by carrays")
>>> Reported-and-tested-by: Yi Zhang <yi.zhang@redhat.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Zhu Yanjun <yanjun.zhu@linux.dev>
>>> V4->V5: Commit logs are changed to avoid confusion.
>>> V3->V4: xa_lock_irq locks are used.
>>> V2->V3: __rxe_add_to_pool is between spin_lock and spin_unlock, so
>>> GFP_ATOMIC is used in __rxe_add_to_pool.
>>> V1->V2: Replace GFP_KERNEL with GFP_ATOMIC
>>> drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_pool.c | 20 ++++++++++++++------
>>> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_pool.c b/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_pool.c
>>> index 87066d04ed18..f1f06dc7e64f 100644
>>> +++ b/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_pool.c
>>> @@ -106,7 +106,7 @@ void rxe_pool_init(struct rxe_dev *rxe, struct rxe_pool *pool,
>>>
>>> atomic_set(&pool->num_elem, 0);
>>>
>>> - xa_init_flags(&pool->xa, XA_FLAGS_ALLOC);
>>> + xa_init_flags(&pool->xa, XA_FLAGS_ALLOC | XA_FLAGS_LOCK_IRQ);
>>> pool->limit.min = info->min_index;
>>> pool->limit.max = info->max_index;
>>> }
>>> @@ -138,8 +138,10 @@ void *rxe_alloc(struct rxe_pool *pool)
>>> elem->obj = obj;
>>> kref_init(&elem->ref_cnt);
>>>
>>> - err = xa_alloc_cyclic(&pool->xa, &elem->index, elem, pool->limit,
>>> - &pool->next, GFP_KERNEL);
>>> + xa_lock_irq(&pool->xa);
>>> + err = __xa_alloc_cyclic(&pool->xa, &elem->index, elem, pool->limit,
>>> + &pool->next, GFP_KERNEL);
>>> + xa_unlock_irq(&pool->xa);
>
> It should just use xa_alloc_cyclic_irq() and xa_erase_irq(). Don't
> open code the lock.
Got it. I will use the above functions.
>
>> I may admit that I didn't follow your previous discussions, so maybe you
>> already explained it. But why do you need xa_lock_irq() here?
>
> The spinlock type needs to be consistent in all users.
>
> You can only use the naked version if the spinlock is always obtained
> from a process context.
>
> You can only use bh version if the spinlock is always obtained from a
> process context or bh/softirq
>
> You can always use the irq version
>
> What I don't understand is why IRQ and not BH? AFAIK there is no case
> where rxe is called from a real IRQ, right? Or is it because you can't
> nest BH under the IRQ spinlock from CM?
Sure. I will use IRQ spinlock. The reason is as below:
1.
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-rdma/patch/20220210073655.42281-2-guoqing.jiang@linux.dev/
2.
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-rdma/patch/20220215194448.44369-1-rpearsonhpe@gmail.com/
The above 2 links are why I used IRQ.
Zhu Yanjun
>
> Jason
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2022-04-21 12:49 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2022-04-17 2:43 [PATCHv5 1/2] RDMA/rxe: Fix a dead lock problem yanjun.zhu
2022-04-17 2:43 ` [PATCHv2 2/2] RDMA/rxe: Use different xa locks on different path yanjun.zhu
2022-04-20 16:34 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-20 6:42 ` [PATCHv5 1/2] RDMA/rxe: Fix a dead lock problem Leon Romanovsky
2022-04-20 16:32 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-21 12:49 ` Yanjun Zhu
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).