From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (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 0B9EF54FA3; Sun, 28 Jan 2024 16:12:36 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1706458357; cv=none; b=D+H4vAZfiB0ZYHfquDmlxEI087Sb+9x3xo/RiicPWT2hUPnVyBgy/pPFl4bnqoC5YyzipTuTCtfCaf0JxV0Dfz2GRKMlUfTrYhHnhewshu2QhzdHCv9dpWvFEKlfpx6D73URfuh2ehf17AG5IzIC4tL875oaXFA+3yYvpzh6an0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1706458357; c=relaxed/simple; bh=8aKHccqRKaxRqRGjKPbEcWHb9fi3toq2KzUKKsr5HSw=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version; b=gAUsfWI9hDElczlKfpUgc6wk+IiovuZ4Z007M0eAETPL1E7/BCrJoLc4ZpR8K+l5kl32ebsmRgsx9TCT7k4w43hpTbYwQAe0PznUO0UFDLz59emREKpaxX+kB/4L8OXm/nku7z484KKFXxwVbakMtC//y0VxZWpHCs6Mz8wG3IY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=tPdJ3mxR; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="tPdJ3mxR" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4C71AC433F1; Sun, 28 Jan 2024 16:12:35 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1706458356; bh=8aKHccqRKaxRqRGjKPbEcWHb9fi3toq2KzUKKsr5HSw=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=tPdJ3mxRFkQmzpqgOYspfu6zfcd3TxjAb6sS4nQEkAOQXOWrqgt77h/tcOVXOjha2 JvYWdEzv2tCJPEf35O1hg5oX2ZD+XzDENlaHmhnzFuGz8Hj7CzVkQH8r2BZX4g1Nvj wM1YJA3LQ1Mbx3aK+Syw6Fs7b0S2cdG2Tq0t7LAfzhz7dUl7SbnDLqEkIEDcRGd3Mz xO7+VoUEwZlT9F8aRhNcGGPRXn/90ZMqqBgGqfGT8Ta5o/isqs5YkTIC5un1RBC4BL /lDMiEgUlUb9X5bmpwF3OWkAOec287t0z0ea23Sdf274t4iqh20lHpEIAUYJpylDWn 4QNytJCWPB+2A== From: Sasha Levin To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org Cc: Philip Yang , Felix Kuehling , Alex Deucher , Sasha Levin , Felix.Kuehling@amd.com, christian.koenig@amd.com, Xinhui.Pan@amd.com, airlied@gmail.com, daniel@ffwll.ch, amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org Subject: [PATCH AUTOSEL 6.7 28/39] drm/amdkfd: Fix lock dependency warning with srcu Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2024 11:10:48 -0500 Message-ID: <20240128161130.200783-28-sashal@kernel.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.43.0 In-Reply-To: <20240128161130.200783-1-sashal@kernel.org> References: <20240128161130.200783-1-sashal@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-stable: review X-Patchwork-Hint: Ignore X-stable-base: Linux 6.7.2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit From: Philip Yang [ Upstream commit 2a9de42e8d3c82c6990d226198602be44f43f340 ] ====================================================== WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected 6.5.0-kfd-yangp #2289 Not tainted ------------------------------------------------------ kworker/0:2/996 is trying to acquire lock: (srcu){.+.+}-{0:0}, at: __synchronize_srcu+0x5/0x1a0 but task is already holding lock: ((work_completion)(&svms->deferred_list_work)){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: process_one_work+0x211/0x560 which lock already depends on the new lock. the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is: -> #3 ((work_completion)(&svms->deferred_list_work)){+.+.}-{0:0}: __flush_work+0x88/0x4f0 svm_range_list_lock_and_flush_work+0x3d/0x110 [amdgpu] svm_range_set_attr+0xd6/0x14c0 [amdgpu] kfd_ioctl+0x1d1/0x630 [amdgpu] __x64_sys_ioctl+0x88/0xc0 -> #2 (&info->lock#2){+.+.}-{3:3}: __mutex_lock+0x99/0xc70 amdgpu_amdkfd_gpuvm_restore_process_bos+0x54/0x740 [amdgpu] restore_process_helper+0x22/0x80 [amdgpu] restore_process_worker+0x2d/0xa0 [amdgpu] process_one_work+0x29b/0x560 worker_thread+0x3d/0x3d0 -> #1 ((work_completion)(&(&process->restore_work)->work)){+.+.}-{0:0}: __flush_work+0x88/0x4f0 __cancel_work_timer+0x12c/0x1c0 kfd_process_notifier_release_internal+0x37/0x1f0 [amdgpu] __mmu_notifier_release+0xad/0x240 exit_mmap+0x6a/0x3a0 mmput+0x6a/0x120 do_exit+0x322/0xb90 do_group_exit+0x37/0xa0 __x64_sys_exit_group+0x18/0x20 do_syscall_64+0x38/0x80 -> #0 (srcu){.+.+}-{0:0}: __lock_acquire+0x1521/0x2510 lock_sync+0x5f/0x90 __synchronize_srcu+0x4f/0x1a0 __mmu_notifier_release+0x128/0x240 exit_mmap+0x6a/0x3a0 mmput+0x6a/0x120 svm_range_deferred_list_work+0x19f/0x350 [amdgpu] process_one_work+0x29b/0x560 worker_thread+0x3d/0x3d0 other info that might help us debug this: Chain exists of: srcu --> &info->lock#2 --> (work_completion)(&svms->deferred_list_work) Possible unsafe locking scenario: CPU0 CPU1 ---- ---- lock((work_completion)(&svms->deferred_list_work)); lock(&info->lock#2); lock((work_completion)(&svms->deferred_list_work)); sync(srcu); Signed-off-by: Philip Yang Reviewed-by: Felix Kuehling Signed-off-by: Alex Deucher Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin --- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_svm.c | 6 ++++-- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_svm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_svm.c index 92d8b1513e57..f66f88d2b643 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_svm.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_svm.c @@ -2366,8 +2366,10 @@ static void svm_range_deferred_list_work(struct work_struct *work) mutex_unlock(&svms->lock); mmap_write_unlock(mm); - /* Pairs with mmget in svm_range_add_list_work */ - mmput(mm); + /* Pairs with mmget in svm_range_add_list_work. If dropping the + * last mm refcount, schedule release work to avoid circular locking + */ + mmput_async(mm); spin_lock(&svms->deferred_list_lock); } -- 2.43.0