From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out30-99.freemail.mail.aliyun.com (out30-99.freemail.mail.aliyun.com [115.124.30.99]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C77DA5B216; Tue, 22 Oct 2024 02:00:18 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=115.124.30.99 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1729562422; cv=none; b=bcXaiGWJvQZpT6x/qti6akK6VCYi2HY71RtkJn8Cx4tCkt/K4RwbhoWfzFrQolhEQQ3sBWoBXE10kaVVWQYc6fZmVBYdi/6ouCrWa9fue70+C7XtV0aP1AaaEpWVQaWI5e/AQYUKmDMEw9Im6WgjFzFZsNbDL6p5bFgQerB097Y= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1729562422; c=relaxed/simple; bh=QY3g6Qwdo5/3ZoYCID2b/TExQufL9KcYp8YD0IzX3qg=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=K67pNNoH5L0Tnh3Ip+5ckNh1NUFNUb/pfegxsd3CPIl5h8T6V6hPXE16fOX25oVqKM1yQieIyM9DNqyuYZlSEQ5GlUs8UetLaVlXId+If3QBMCBfpDfRG7m5GRxBD/qKmS9JMRG64MseRZhw2EUDQnfZVXi7BhCNTMtUy/8ZP5g= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.alibaba.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.alibaba.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.alibaba.com header.i=@linux.alibaba.com header.b=yptbV/tP; arc=none smtp.client-ip=115.124.30.99 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.alibaba.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.alibaba.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.alibaba.com header.i=@linux.alibaba.com header.b="yptbV/tP" DKIM-Signature:v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.alibaba.com; s=default; t=1729562411; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:From:Content-Type; bh=jnB/hhMsFk72J+nzMdTPHQDhD1sA65aIl7jzVIYxuj8=; b=yptbV/tPfpJkhxaCVi3vC4f76jdzPs6sAh53jAz6LQJnJuTeHZtXlOZLgr34TUYfLKRuRGFPsGi6biH4M9HCLfUonCviNhKFdce0Y3OW/j9rB6RGMysnyW/0PkfQbtGCdnu8/slcxYtH8vSvhQ4m3Be8A1/T0oQdVC6V9rS2uMg= Received: from 30.221.147.210(mailfrom:alibuda@linux.alibaba.com fp:SMTPD_---0WHfyQem_1729562409 cluster:ay36) by smtp.aliyun-inc.com; Tue, 22 Oct 2024 10:00:10 +0800 Message-ID: <17c1f52d-e032-44c1-8f56-34d5cd8e30ac@linux.alibaba.com> Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2024 10:00:09 +0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2 RESEND] resolve gtp possible deadlock warning To: Daniel Yang , Wenjia Zhang , Jan Karcher , Tony Lu , Wen Gu , "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Jakub Kicinski , Paolo Abeni , linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: syzbot+e953a8f3071f5c0a28fd@syzkaller.appspotmail.com References: Content-Language: en-US From: "D. Wythe" In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 10/16/24 6:48 AM, Daniel Yang wrote: > From: Daniel Yang > > Moved lockdep annotation to separate function for readability. > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Yang > Reported-by: syzbot+e953a8f3071f5c0a28fd@syzkaller.appspotmail.com > > --- > net/smc/smc_inet.c | 28 +++++++++++++++------------- > 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/net/smc/smc_inet.c b/net/smc/smc_inet.c > index 7ae49ffd2..b3eedc3b0 100644 > --- a/net/smc/smc_inet.c > +++ b/net/smc/smc_inet.c > @@ -111,18 +111,7 @@ static struct inet_protosw smc_inet6_protosw = { > static struct lock_class_key smc_slock_keys[2]; > static struct lock_class_key smc_keys[2]; > > -static int smc_inet_init_sock(struct sock *sk) > -{ > - struct net *net = sock_net(sk); > - int rc; > - > - /* init common smc sock */ > - smc_sk_init(net, sk, IPPROTO_SMC); > - /* create clcsock */ > - rc = smc_create_clcsk(net, sk, sk->sk_family); > - if (rc) > - return rc; > - > +static inline void smc_inet_lockdep_annotate(struct sock *sk) { > switch (sk->sk_family) { > case AF_INET: > sock_lock_init_class_and_name(sk, "slock-AF_INET-SMC", > @@ -139,8 +128,21 @@ static int smc_inet_init_sock(struct sock *sk) > default: > WARN_ON_ONCE(1); > } > +} > > - return 0; > +static int smc_inet_init_sock(struct sock *sk) > +{ > + struct net *net = sock_net(sk); > + int rc; > + > + /* init common smc sock */ > + smc_sk_init(net, sk, IPPROTO_SMC); > + /* create clcsock */ > + rc = smc_create_clcsk(net, sk, sk->sk_family); > + if (!rc) > + smc_inet_lockdep_annotate(sk); > + > + return rc; > } > > int __init smc_inet_init(void) I need to check why you said Wang Cong's patch cannot fix the issue. As soon as I reach a conclusion, I'll inform you right away. D. Wythe