[PATCH 4.17 255/324] sfc: avoid hang from nested use of the filter_sem

Greg Kroah-Hartman
2018-08-23T09:03:49Z

From: Bert Kenward <bkenward@solarflare.com>

[ Upstream commit 1c56c0994a533ce564843a0d17af7a3e6e68f269 ]

In some situations we may end up calling down_read while already
holding the semaphore for write, thus hanging. This has been seen
when setting the MAC address for the interface. The hung task log
in this situation includes this stack:
down_read
efx_ef10_filter_insert
efx_ef10_filter_insert_addr_list
efx_ef10_filter_vlan_sync_rx_mode
efx_ef10_filter_add_vlan
efx_ef10_filter_table_probe
efx_ef10_set_mac_address
efx_set_mac_address
dev_set_mac_address

In addition, lockdep rightly points out that nested calling of
down_read is incorrect.

Fixes: c2bebe37c6b6 ("sfc: give ef10 its own rwsem in the filter table instead of filter_lock")
Tested-by: Jarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Bert Kenward <bkenward@solarflare.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <alexander.levin@microsoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
---
drivers/net/ethernet/sfc/ef10.c | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++---------
1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/sfc/ef10.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/sfc/ef10.c
@@ -4288,9 +4288,9 @@ static int efx_ef10_filter_pri(struct ef
return -EPROTONOSUPPORT;
}

-static s32 efx_ef10_filter_insert(struct efx_nic *efx,
- struct efx_filter_spec *spec,
- bool replace_equal)
+static s32 efx_ef10_filter_insert_locked(struct efx_nic *efx,
+ struct efx_filter_spec *spec,
+ bool replace_equal)
{
DECLARE_BITMAP(mc_rem_map, EFX_EF10_FILTER_SEARCH_LIMIT);
struct efx_ef10_nic_data *nic_data = efx->nic_data;
@@ -4307,7 +4307,7 @@ static s32 efx_ef10_filter_insert(struct
bool is_mc_recip;
s32 rc;

- down_read(&efx->filter_sem);
+ WARN_ON(!rwsem_is_locked(&efx->filter_sem));
table = efx->filter_state;
down_write(&table->lock);

@@ -4498,10 +4498,22 @@ out_unlock:
if (rss_locked)
mutex_unlock(&efx->rss_lock);
up_write(&table->lock);
- up_read(&efx->filter_sem);
return rc;
}

+static s32 efx_ef10_filter_insert(struct efx_nic *efx,
+ struct efx_filter_spec *spec,
+ bool replace_equal)
+{
+ s32 ret;
+
+ down_read(&efx->filter_sem);
+ ret = efx_ef10_filter_insert_locked(efx, spec, replace_equal);
+ up_read(&efx->filter_sem);
+
+ return ret;
+}
+
static void efx_ef10_filter_update_rx_scatter(struct efx_nic *efx)
{
/* no need to do anything here on EF10 */
@@ -5284,7 +5296,7 @@ static int efx_ef10_filter_insert_addr_l
EFX_WARN_ON_PARANOID(ids[i] != EFX_EF10_FILTER_ID_INVALID);
efx_filter_init_rx(&spec, EFX_FILTER_PRI_AUTO, filter_flags, 0);
efx_filter_set_eth_local(&spec, vlan->vid, addr_list[i].addr);
- rc = efx_ef10_filter_insert(efx, &spec, true);
+ rc = efx_ef10_filter_insert_locked(efx, &spec, true);
if (rc < 0) {
if (rollback) {
netif_info(efx, drv, efx->net_dev,
@@ -5313,7 +5325,7 @@ static int efx_ef10_filter_insert_addr_l
efx_filter_init_rx(&spec, EFX_FILTER_PRI_AUTO, filter_flags, 0);
eth_broadcast_addr(baddr);
efx_filter_set_eth_local(&spec, vlan->vid, baddr);
- rc = efx_ef10_filter_insert(efx, &spec, true);
+ rc = efx_ef10_filter_insert_locked(efx, &spec, true);
if (rc < 0) {
netif_warn(efx, drv, efx->net_dev,
"Broadcast filter insert failed rc=%d\n", rc);
@@ -5369,7 +5381,7 @@ static int efx_ef10_filter_insert_def(st
if (vlan->vid != EFX_FILTER_VID_UNSPEC)
efx_filter_set_eth_local(&spec, vlan->vid, NULL);

- rc = efx_ef10_filter_insert(efx, &spec, true);
+ rc = efx_ef10_filter_insert_locked(efx, &spec, true);
if (rc < 0) {
const char *um = multicast ? "Multicast" : "Unicast";
const char *encap_name = "";
@@ -5429,7 +5441,7 @@ static int efx_ef10_filter_insert_def(st
filter_flags, 0);
eth_broadcast_addr(baddr);
efx_filter_set_eth_local(&spec, vlan->vid, baddr);
- rc = efx_ef10_filter_insert(efx, &spec, true);
+ rc = efx_ef10_filter_insert_locked(efx, &spec, true);
if (rc < 0) {
netif_warn(efx, drv, efx->net_dev,
"Broadcast filter insert failed rc=%d\n",