From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: davem@davemloft.net
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, edumazet@google.com, pabeni@redhat.com,
andrew+netdev@lunn.ch, horms@kernel.org, sdf.kernel@gmail.com,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH net-next v2 1/2] net: use two lockdep classes for the netdev instance lock
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2026 21:18:31 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260926041832.1649675-1-kuba@kernel.org> (raw)
netdev_lockdep_set_classes() puts dev->lock in a separate lockdep class,
by type (netkit vs dummy etc), with the intent of keeping the instance
locks of individual devices as independent from each other as possible.
In practice it does the opposite. lockdep only calls the cmp_fn for locks
of the same class, so netdev_lock_cmp_fn() never gets a say when devices
from different classes are nested. Instead lockdep records a dependency
between the classes, and reports a circular locking problem as soon as
the nesting happens the other way round, e.g. when devices are unregistered
in a batch.
======================================================
WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
7.3.0-rc3+ #26 Not tainted
------------------------------------------------------
kworker/u256:1/326 is trying to acquire lock:
ff110000104fce28 (&dev_instance_lock_key#6){+.+.}-{4:4}, at:
unregister_netdevice_many_notify+0x1141/0x1c30
but task is already holding lock:
ff110000127f2e28 (&dev_instance_lock_key#7){+.+.}-{4:4}, at:
unregister_netdevice_many_notify+0x1141/0x1c30
-> #1 (&dev_instance_lock_key#7){+.+.}-{4:4}:
__lock_acquire+0x767/0xd60
lock_acquire.part.0+0xd0/0x260
__mutex_lock+0x17d/0x1f20
unregister_netdevice_many_notify+0x1141/0x1c30
default_device_exit_batch+0x3ee/0x520
ops_undo_list+0x2cc/0x8a0
cleanup_net+0x442/0x9c0
process_one_work+0x951/0x1ab0
worker_thread+0x5a6/0xd10
kthread+0x339/0x430
ret_from_fork+0x4a4/0x6f0
ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30
-> #0 (&dev_instance_lock_key#6){+.+.}-{4:4}:
check_prev_add+0xeb/0xe60
validate_chain+0x598/0x900
__lock_acquire+0x767/0xd60
lock_acquire.part.0+0xd0/0x260
__mutex_lock+0x17d/0x1f20
unregister_netdevice_many_notify+0x1141/0x1c30
default_device_exit_batch+0x3ee/0x520
ops_undo_list+0x2cc/0x8a0
cleanup_net+0x442/0x9c0
process_one_work+0x951/0x1ab0
worker_thread+0x5a6/0xd10
kthread+0x339/0x430
ret_from_fork+0x4a4/0x6f0
ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30
Possible unsafe locking scenario:
CPU0 CPU1
---- ----
lock(&dev_instance_lock_key#7);
lock(&dev_instance_lock_key#6);
lock(&dev_instance_lock_key#7);
lock(&dev_instance_lock_key#6);
*** DEADLOCK ***
locks held by kworker/u256:1/326: 6, last CPU#6:
#0: ff11000001c2b540 ((wq_completion)netns){+.+.}-{0:0}, at:
process_one_work+0x117c/0x1ab0
#1: ffa0000001a3fd18 (net_cleanup_work){+.+.}-{0:0}, at:
process_one_work+0x8ce/0x1ab0
#2: ffffffff98f53288 (pernet_ops_rwsem){++++}-{4:4}, at:
cleanup_net+0xc1/0x9c0
#3: ffffffff98f6ede0 (rtnl_mutex){+.+.}-{4:4}, at:
default_device_exit_batch+0x92/0x520
#4: ff1100001321ae28 (&dev_instance_lock_key#7){+.+.}-{4:4}, at:
unregister_netdevice_many_notify+0x1141/0x1c30
We can't put all devices in the same class, that'd be too permissive.
netdev_nl_queue_create_doit() and netdev_nl_bind_tx_doit() lock
a virtual device (netkit) before a physical device, without rtnl_lock.
We can never allow locking in the opposite order even under rtnl_lock.
cmp_fn cannot enforce this sort of rule: lockdep keys its chain cache on
the sequence of lock classes, so with a single class both orders hash
to the same chain and only whichever happens first is validated.
netdev_lock_cmp_fn() itself has another source of false-negatives.
lockdep calls it from within __lock_acquire(), with the recursion counter
already raised, so lock_is_held_type() always returns LOCK_STATE_UNKNOWN,
which means lockdep_rtnl_is_held() always returns true / held.
Use rtnl_is_locked(), which looks at the mutex directly and does
work from that context. We may still miss a bad case if some other
process is holding the lock, not us, but that's better than the
100% false negative rate of lockdep_rtnl_is_held().
One last thing, lockdep compares the address of the cmp function,
so it can't be a static inline - that would work similarly to having
separate classes, again. Move it to a source file.
Tested by nesting two instance locks from a module, one scenario per boot
since the first splat turns debug_locks off:
first second rtnl reported
-----------------------------------------------------------
virt->virt no recursive locking
virt->virt yes -
virt->phys no -
virt->phys yes -
phys->virt no - (records the edge)
phys->virt yes - (records the edge)
phys->phys no recursive locking
phys->phys yes -
virt->phys phys->virt no, no circular dependency
virt->phys phys->virt no, yes circular dependency
virt->phys phys->virt yes, no circular dependency
virt->phys phys->virt yes, yes circular dependency
phys->virt virt->phys no, no circular dependency
phys->virt virt->phys yes, yes circular dependency
virt->virt virt->virt yes, no recursive locking
phys->phys phys->phys yes, no recursive locking
(netkit and dummy stood in for the virtual devices, virtio_net and
netdevsim for the physical ones.)
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
---
v1: https://lore.kernel.org/20260923223545.3815583-1-kuba@kernel.org
---
include/net/netdev_lock.h | 20 +++-----------------
net/core/dev.c | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/net/netdev_lock.h b/include/net/netdev_lock.h
index 9fb3e93857c3..edd8cc2e2b36 100644
--- a/include/net/netdev_lock.h
+++ b/include/net/netdev_lock.h
@@ -110,34 +110,20 @@ static inline int netdev_is_locked_ops_compat(const struct net_device *dev)
return lockdep_rtnl_is_held();
}
-static inline int netdev_lock_cmp_fn(const struct lockdep_map *a,
- const struct lockdep_map *b)
-{
- if (a == b)
- return 0;
-
- /* Allow locking multiple devices only under rtnl_lock,
- * the exact order doesn't matter.
- * Note that upper devices don't lock their ops, so nesting
- * mostly happens in batched device removal for now.
- */
- return lockdep_rtnl_is_held() ? -1 : 1;
-}
+void netdev_set_instance_lock_class(struct net_device *dev);
#define netdev_lockdep_set_classes(dev) \
{ \
static struct lock_class_key qdisc_tx_busylock_key; \
static struct lock_class_key qdisc_xmit_lock_key; \
static struct lock_class_key dev_addr_list_lock_key; \
- static struct lock_class_key dev_instance_lock_key; \
unsigned int i; \
\
(dev)->qdisc_tx_busylock = &qdisc_tx_busylock_key; \
lockdep_set_class(&(dev)->addr_list_lock, \
&dev_addr_list_lock_key); \
- lockdep_set_class(&(dev)->lock, \
- &dev_instance_lock_key); \
- lock_set_cmp_fn(&dev->lock, netdev_lock_cmp_fn, NULL); \
+ if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING)) \
+ netdev_set_instance_lock_class(dev); \
for (i = 0; i < (dev)->num_tx_queues; i++) \
lockdep_set_class(&(dev)->_tx[i]._xmit_lock, \
&qdisc_xmit_lock_key); \
diff --git a/net/core/dev.c b/net/core/dev.c
index f660fccfc0db..a8eb382f40ca 100644
--- a/net/core/dev.c
+++ b/net/core/dev.c
@@ -568,6 +568,41 @@ static inline void netdev_set_addr_lockdep_class(struct net_device *dev)
}
#endif
+#ifdef CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING
+static int netdev_lock_cmp_fn(const struct lockdep_map *a,
+ const struct lockdep_map *b)
+{
+ if (a == b)
+ return 0;
+
+ /* @a and @b must be of same class - both virtual or physical.
+ * cmp_fn won't be called for devices of different classes.
+ *
+ * For the same class only allow nesting under the protection
+ * of rtnl_lock. Note that we can't use lockdep_rtnl_is_held()
+ * here, it always answers UNKNOWN from within lockdep.
+ */
+ return rtnl_is_locked() ? -1 : 1;
+}
+
+/* A virtual device can be locked before the physical device it leases
+ * queues from, see netdev_nl_queue_create_doit(). Keep the two kinds
+ * in separate classes so the dependency graph enforces the order;
+ * netdev_lock_cmp_fn() then only has to rule on same-class nesting.
+ */
+void netdev_set_instance_lock_class(struct net_device *dev)
+{
+ static struct lock_class_key netdev_virt_instance_lock_key;
+
+ if (dev->dev.parent)
+ return;
+
+ lockdep_set_class(&dev->lock, &netdev_virt_instance_lock_key);
+ lock_set_cmp_fn(&dev->lock, netdev_lock_cmp_fn, NULL);
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(netdev_set_instance_lock_class);
+#endif
+
/*******************************************************************************
*
* Protocol management and registration routines
@@ -12183,6 +12218,8 @@ struct net_device *alloc_netdev_mqs(int sizeof_priv, const char *name,
#endif
mutex_init(&dev->lock);
+ /* see also netdev_set_instance_lock_class() */
+ lock_set_cmp_fn(&dev->lock, netdev_lock_cmp_fn, NULL);
netif_rx_mode_init(dev);
dev->priv_flags = IFF_XMIT_DST_RELEASE | IFF_XMIT_DST_RELEASE_PERM;
--
2.55.0
next reply other threads:[~2026-09-26 4:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-26 4:18 Jakub Kicinski [this message]
2026-09-26 4:18 ` [PATCH net-next v2 2/2] selftests: net: add test for netdev instance lock ordering on unregister Jakub Kicinski
2026-09-26 7:08 ` [PATCH net-next v2 1/2] net: use two lockdep classes for the netdev instance lock Eric Dumazet
2026-09-28 18:21 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-09-28 16:40 ` Stanislav Fomichev
2026-09-29 11:19 ` Paolo Abeni
2026-09-29 11:30 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
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=20260926041832.1649675-1-kuba@kernel.org \
--to=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=andrew+netdev@lunn.ch \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=horms@kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=sdf.kernel@gmail.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