From: Amit Machhiwal <amachhiw@linux.ibm.com>
To: Shivaprasad G Bhat <sbhat@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: maddy@linux.ibm.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
harshpb@linux.ibm.com, mpe@ellerman.id.au, npiggin@gmail.com,
chleroy@kernel.org, ritesh.list@gmail.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] powerpc/eeh: Fix recursive locking on devices without EEH sensitive driver
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2026 15:46:27 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260715154411.36742571-f0-amachhiw@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <178404937381.913.2759874335293830160.stgit@linux.ibm.com>
On 2026/07/14 05:16 PM, Shivaprasad G Bhat wrote:
> The commit 1010b4c012b0 ("powerpc/eeh: Make EEH driver device hotplug
> safe") refactored the EEH code such that the pci_rescan_remove_lock is
> held at the beginning of eeh_handle_normal_event() and the
> eeh_reset_device() is called with that lock being held. Looks like the
> commit missed to remove the existing lock/unlock inside eeh_rmv_device()
> which is no longer necessary. This is causing the eehd to hang on the
> lock which it actually holds when that code path is taken.
>
> [<0>] 0xc00000011c78f870
> [<0>] __switch_to+0xfc/0x1a0
> [<0>] pci_lock_rescan_remove+0x30/0x44
> [<0>] eeh_rmv_device+0x290/0x2e0
> [<0>] eeh_pe_dev_traverse+0x80/0x130
> [<0>] eeh_reset_device+0xcc/0x23c
> [<0>] eeh_handle_normal_event+0x830/0xa80
> [<0>] eeh_event_handler+0xf8/0x190
> [<0>] kthread+0x194/0x1b0
> [<0>] start_kernel_thread+0x14/0x18
>
> The issue is seen for cases where the errors are detected on the PHB
> directly AND|OR for devices where the driver error_detected() returns
> PCI_ERS_RESULT_NEED_RESET, and driver being not EEH sensitive(i.e no
> error handlers like slot_reset(), resume() etc defined).
>
> Fixes: 1010b4c012b0 ("powerpc/eeh: Make EEH driver device hotplug safe")
> Cc: stable <stable@kernel.org>
> Reviewed-by: Ritesh Harjani (IBM) <ritesh.list@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Shivaprasad G Bhat <sbhat@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
> arch/powerpc/kernel/eeh_driver.c | 2 --
> 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
The change makes sense. eeh_handle_normal_event() already holds the
rescan/remove lock across eeh_reset_device(), so taking it again in
eeh_rmv_device() can deadlock exactly as described.
Reviewed-by: Amit Machhiwal <amachhiw@linux.ibm.com>
Thanks,
Amit
>
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/eeh_driver.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/eeh_driver.c
> index 028f69158532..d64cce17a4e0 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/eeh_driver.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/eeh_driver.c
> @@ -533,9 +533,7 @@ static void eeh_rmv_device(struct eeh_dev *edev, void *userdata)
> if (rmv_data)
> list_add(&edev->rmv_entry, &rmv_data->removed_vf_list);
> } else {
> - pci_lock_rescan_remove();
> pci_stop_and_remove_bus_device(dev);
> - pci_unlock_rescan_remove();
> }
> }
>
>
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-15 10:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-14 17:16 [PATCH v2] powerpc/eeh: Fix recursive locking on devices without EEH sensitive driver Shivaprasad G Bhat
2026-07-15 10:16 ` Amit Machhiwal [this message]
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=20260715154411.36742571-f0-amachhiw@linux.ibm.com \
--to=amachhiw@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=chleroy@kernel.org \
--cc=harshpb@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=maddy@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=ritesh.list@gmail.com \
--cc=sbhat@linux.ibm.com \
/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