From: Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@kernel.org>
To: Philipp Stanner <pstanner@redhat.com>,
Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>
Cc: "Bjorn Helgaas" <bhelgaas@google.com>,
"Krzysztof Wilczyński" <kwilczynski@kernel.org>,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI: Fix devres regression in pci_intx()
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2024 17:25:57 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <24c1308a-a056-4b5b-aece-057d54262811@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2887936e2d655834ea28e07957b1c1ccd9e68e27.camel@redhat.com>
On 2024/09/04 16:06, Philipp Stanner wrote:
> On Tue, 2024-09-03 at 09:44 -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
>> On Thu, 25 Jul 2024 14:07:30 +0200
>> Philipp Stanner <pstanner@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>>> pci_intx() is a function that becomes managed if
>>> pcim_enable_device()
>>> has been called in advance. Commit 25216afc9db5 ("PCI: Add managed
>>> pcim_intx()") changed this behavior so that pci_intx() always leads
>>> to
>>> creation of a separate device resource for itself, whereas earlier,
>>> a
>>> shared resource was used for all PCI devres operations.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, pci_intx() seems to be used in some drivers'
>>> remove()
>>> paths; in the managed case this causes a device resource to be
>>> created
>>> on driver detach.
>>>
>>> Fix the regression by only redirecting pci_intx() to its managed
>>> twin
>>> pcim_intx() if the pci_command changes.
>>>
>>> Fixes: 25216afc9db5 ("PCI: Add managed pcim_intx()")
>>
>> I'm seeing another issue from this, which is maybe a more general
>> problem with managed mode. In my case I'm using vfio-pci to assign
>> an
>> ahci controller to a VM.
>
> "In my case" doesn't mean OOT, does it? I can't fully follow.
>
>> ahci_init_one() calls pcim_enable_device()
>> which sets is_managed = true. I notice that nothing ever sets
>> is_managed to false. Therefore now when I call pci_intx() from vfio-
>> pci
>> under spinlock, I get a lockdep warning
>
> I suppose you see the lockdep warning because the new pcim_intx() can
> now allocate, whereas before 25216afc9db5 it was pcim_enable_device()
> which allocated *everything* related to PCI devres.
>
>> as I no go through pcim_intx()
>> code after 25216afc9db5
>
> You alwas went through pcim_intx()'s logic. The issue seems to be that
> the allocation step was moved.
>
>> since the previous driver was managed.
>
> what do you mean by "previous driver"?
The AHCI driver... When attaching a PCI dev to vfio to e.g. passthrough to a VM,
the device driver must first be unbound and the device bound to vfio-pci. So we
switch from ahci/libata driver to vfio. When vfio tries to enable intx with
is_managed still true from the use of the device by ahci, problem happen.
>
>> It seems
>> like we should be setting is_managed to false is the driver release
>> path, right?
>
> So the issue seems to be that the same struct pci_dev can be used by
> different drivers, is that correct?
>
> If so, I think that can be addressed trough having
> pcim_disable_device() set is_managed to false as you suggest.
>
> Another solution can could at least consider would be to use a
> GFP_ATOMIC for allocation in get_or_create_intx_devres().
If it is allowed to call pci_intx() under a spin_lock, then we need GFP_ATOMIC.
If not, then vfio-pci needs to move the call out of the spinlock.
Either solution must be implemented regardless of the fix to set is_managed to
false.
So what context is allowed to call pci_intx() ? The current kdoc comment does
not say...
--
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-09-04 8:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-07-25 12:07 [PATCH] PCI: Fix devres regression in pci_intx() Philipp Stanner
2024-07-25 14:26 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-07-25 15:21 ` Philipp Stanner
2024-07-25 15:47 ` Christoph Hellwig
2024-07-25 21:00 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2024-07-26 0:19 ` Damien Le Moal
2024-07-26 18:43 ` pstanner
2024-07-26 18:59 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2024-07-29 11:29 ` Damien Le Moal
2024-07-29 15:45 ` Philipp Stanner
2024-09-03 15:44 ` Alex Williamson
2024-09-04 7:06 ` Philipp Stanner
2024-09-04 8:25 ` Damien Le Moal [this message]
2024-09-04 13:37 ` Philipp Stanner
2024-09-04 18:07 ` Alex Williamson
2024-09-04 20:24 ` Andy Shevchenko
2024-09-04 21:10 ` Alex Williamson
2024-09-05 0:33 ` Damien Le Moal
2024-09-05 1:56 ` Alex Williamson
2024-09-05 7:13 ` Philipp Stanner
2024-09-06 0:37 ` Damien Le Moal
2024-09-06 6:45 ` Philipp Stanner
2024-09-04 12:57 ` Alex Williamson
2024-09-04 13:29 ` Philipp Stanner
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=24c1308a-a056-4b5b-aece-057d54262811@kernel.org \
--to=dlemoal@kernel.org \
--cc=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=kwilczynski@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pstanner@redhat.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