linux-rt-users.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-rt-users <linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Carsten Emde <C.Emde@osadl.org>, John Kacur <jkacur@redhat.com>,
	Roland Dreier <roland@purestorage.com>,
	David Woodhouse <David.Woodhouse@intel.com>
Subject: [PATCH 03/10] intel-iommu: Fix AB-BA lockdep report
Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2011 20:46:44 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111203014743.642564426@goodmis.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 20111203014641.165123482@goodmis.org

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 6985 bytes --]

From: Roland Dreier <roland@purestorage.com>

When unbinding a device so that I could pass it through to a KVM VM, I
got the lockdep report below.  It looks like a legitimate lock
ordering problem:

 - domain_context_mapping_one() takes iommu->lock and calls
   iommu_support_dev_iotlb(), which takes device_domain_lock (inside
   iommu->lock).

 - domain_remove_one_dev_info() starts by taking device_domain_lock
   then takes iommu->lock inside it (near the end of the function).

So this is the classic AB-BA deadlock.  It looks like a safe fix is to
simply release device_domain_lock a bit earlier, since as far as I can
tell, it doesn't protect any of the stuff accessed at the end of
domain_remove_one_dev_info() anyway.

BTW, the use of device_domain_lock looks a bit unsafe to me... it's
at least not obvious to me why we aren't vulnerable to the race below:

  iommu_support_dev_iotlb()
                                          domain_remove_dev_info()

  lock device_domain_lock
    find info
  unlock device_domain_lock

                                          lock device_domain_lock
                                            find same info
                                          unlock device_domain_lock

                                          free_devinfo_mem(info)

  do stuff with info after it's free

However I don't understand the locking here well enough to know if
this is a real problem, let alone what the best fix is.

Anyway here's the full lockdep output that prompted all of this:

     =======================================================
     [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
     2.6.39.1+ #1
     -------------------------------------------------------
     bash/13954 is trying to acquire lock:
      (&(&iommu->lock)->rlock){......}, at: [<ffffffff812f6421>] domain_remove_one_dev_info+0x121/0x230

     but task is already holding lock:
      (device_domain_lock){-.-...}, at: [<ffffffff812f6508>] domain_remove_one_dev_info+0x208/0x230

     which lock already depends on the new lock.

     the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:

     -> #1 (device_domain_lock){-.-...}:
            [<ffffffff8109ca9d>] lock_acquire+0x9d/0x130
            [<ffffffff81571475>] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x55/0xa0
            [<ffffffff812f8350>] domain_context_mapping_one+0x600/0x750
            [<ffffffff812f84df>] domain_context_mapping+0x3f/0x120
            [<ffffffff812f9175>] iommu_prepare_identity_map+0x1c5/0x1e0
            [<ffffffff81ccf1ca>] intel_iommu_init+0x88e/0xb5e
            [<ffffffff81cab204>] pci_iommu_init+0x16/0x41
            [<ffffffff81002165>] do_one_initcall+0x45/0x190
            [<ffffffff81ca3d3f>] kernel_init+0xe3/0x168
            [<ffffffff8157ac24>] kernel_thread_helper+0x4/0x10

     -> #0 (&(&iommu->lock)->rlock){......}:
            [<ffffffff8109bf3e>] __lock_acquire+0x195e/0x1e10
            [<ffffffff8109ca9d>] lock_acquire+0x9d/0x130
            [<ffffffff81571475>] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x55/0xa0
            [<ffffffff812f6421>] domain_remove_one_dev_info+0x121/0x230
            [<ffffffff812f8b42>] device_notifier+0x72/0x90
            [<ffffffff8157555c>] notifier_call_chain+0x8c/0xc0
            [<ffffffff81089768>] __blocking_notifier_call_chain+0x78/0xb0
            [<ffffffff810897b6>] blocking_notifier_call_chain+0x16/0x20
            [<ffffffff81373a5c>] __device_release_driver+0xbc/0xe0
            [<ffffffff81373ccf>] device_release_driver+0x2f/0x50
            [<ffffffff81372ee3>] driver_unbind+0xa3/0xc0
            [<ffffffff813724ac>] drv_attr_store+0x2c/0x30
            [<ffffffff811e4506>] sysfs_write_file+0xe6/0x170
            [<ffffffff8117569e>] vfs_write+0xce/0x190
            [<ffffffff811759e4>] sys_write+0x54/0xa0
            [<ffffffff81579a82>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b

     other info that might help us debug this:

     6 locks held by bash/13954:
      #0:  (&buffer->mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff811e4464>] sysfs_write_file+0x44/0x170
      #1:  (s_active#3){++++.+}, at: [<ffffffff811e44ed>] sysfs_write_file+0xcd/0x170
      #2:  (&__lockdep_no_validate__){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff81372edb>] driver_unbind+0x9b/0xc0
      #3:  (&__lockdep_no_validate__){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff81373cc7>] device_release_driver+0x27/0x50
      #4:  (&(&priv->bus_notifier)->rwsem){.+.+.+}, at: [<ffffffff8108974f>] __blocking_notifier_call_chain+0x5f/0xb0
      #5:  (device_domain_lock){-.-...}, at: [<ffffffff812f6508>] domain_remove_one_dev_info+0x208/0x230

     stack backtrace:
     Pid: 13954, comm: bash Not tainted 2.6.39.1+ #1
     Call Trace:
      [<ffffffff810993a7>] print_circular_bug+0xf7/0x100
      [<ffffffff8109bf3e>] __lock_acquire+0x195e/0x1e10
      [<ffffffff810972bd>] ? trace_hardirqs_off+0xd/0x10
      [<ffffffff8109d57d>] ? trace_hardirqs_on_caller+0x13d/0x180
      [<ffffffff8109ca9d>] lock_acquire+0x9d/0x130
      [<ffffffff812f6421>] ? domain_remove_one_dev_info+0x121/0x230
      [<ffffffff81571475>] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x55/0xa0
      [<ffffffff812f6421>] ? domain_remove_one_dev_info+0x121/0x230
      [<ffffffff810972bd>] ? trace_hardirqs_off+0xd/0x10
      [<ffffffff812f6421>] domain_remove_one_dev_info+0x121/0x230
      [<ffffffff812f8b42>] device_notifier+0x72/0x90
      [<ffffffff8157555c>] notifier_call_chain+0x8c/0xc0
      [<ffffffff81089768>] __blocking_notifier_call_chain+0x78/0xb0
      [<ffffffff810897b6>] blocking_notifier_call_chain+0x16/0x20
      [<ffffffff81373a5c>] __device_release_driver+0xbc/0xe0
      [<ffffffff81373ccf>] device_release_driver+0x2f/0x50
      [<ffffffff81372ee3>] driver_unbind+0xa3/0xc0
      [<ffffffff813724ac>] drv_attr_store+0x2c/0x30
      [<ffffffff811e4506>] sysfs_write_file+0xe6/0x170
      [<ffffffff8117569e>] vfs_write+0xce/0x190
      [<ffffffff811759e4>] sys_write+0x54/0xa0
      [<ffffffff81579a82>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b

Signed-off-by: Roland Dreier <roland@purestorage.com>
Signed-off-by: David Woodhouse <David.Woodhouse@intel.com>
---
 drivers/pci/intel-iommu.c |    4 ++--
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/pci/intel-iommu.c b/drivers/pci/intel-iommu.c
index 8c2564d..bc05a51 100644
--- a/drivers/pci/intel-iommu.c
+++ b/drivers/pci/intel-iommu.c
@@ -3569,6 +3569,8 @@ static void domain_remove_one_dev_info(struct dmar_domain *domain,
 			found = 1;
 	}
 
+	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&device_domain_lock, flags);
+
 	if (found == 0) {
 		unsigned long tmp_flags;
 		spin_lock_irqsave(&domain->iommu_lock, tmp_flags);
@@ -3585,8 +3587,6 @@ static void domain_remove_one_dev_info(struct dmar_domain *domain,
 			spin_unlock_irqrestore(&iommu->lock, tmp_flags);
 		}
 	}
-
-	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&device_domain_lock, flags);
 }
 
 static void vm_domain_remove_all_dev_info(struct dmar_domain *domain)
-- 
1.7.7.1



[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

  parent reply	other threads:[~2011-12-03  1:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-12-03  1:46 [PATCH 00/10] [ANNOUNCE] 3.0.12-rt30-rc1 Steven Rostedt
2011-12-03  1:46 ` [PATCH 01/10] tasklet/rt: Prevent tasklets from going into infinite spin in RT Steven Rostedt
2011-12-03  1:46 ` [PATCH 02/10] genirq: fix regression in irqfixup, irqpoll Steven Rostedt
2011-12-03  1:46 ` Steven Rostedt [this message]
2011-12-03  1:46 ` [PATCH 04/10] KVM: Sanitize cpuid Steven Rostedt
2011-12-03 16:31   ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-12-04 16:53     ` Steven Rostedt
2011-12-03  1:46 ` [PATCH 05/10] wait: Provide __wake_up_all_locked Steven Rostedt
2011-12-03  1:46 ` [PATCH 06/10] pci: Use __wake_up_all_locked pci_unblock_user_cfg_access() Steven Rostedt
2011-12-03  1:46 ` [PATCH 07/10] acpi: Make gbl_[hardware|gpe]_lock raw Steven Rostedt
2011-12-03  1:46 ` [PATCH 08/10] slab, lockdep: Fix silly bug Steven Rostedt
2011-12-03  1:46 ` [PATCH 09/10] slab, lockdep: Annotate all slab caches Steven Rostedt
2011-12-03  1:46 ` [PATCH 10/10] Linux v3.0.12-rt30-rc1 Steven Rostedt

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=20111203014743.642564426@goodmis.org \
    --to=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=C.Emde@osadl.org \
    --cc=David.Woodhouse@intel.com \
    --cc=jkacur@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=roland@purestorage.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /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).