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 479E4182C3; Sat, 3 Feb 2024 04:10:40 +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=1706933441; cv=none; b=b3WI/w/RnQWpQiLBQ/qhfeScjhonTNv7WUBaEy/+AZYZsiZMP7/rEve2AyBNKJgEP05jVMAMKn8V0CDa63MX8hBYbIO8sz2g/8c/s5SQnYskzHlZ+GID4x3PuGwpPT0Xayt3gT8Yyu+E3yj1BFwxHy3uwj2BcMfLlCg7QWVSO3k= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1706933441; c=relaxed/simple; bh=xku+5UeQZdn5rH3qR8vSFbP4fgNaE1vVkJeeNz9X+Yo=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version; b=XzCAcCUnaqBdYi4B0Klf/t4xQd7SROpWkIKRescuFMIIB7b1gAqU8qllFo1wSXEZVGt+19Jp1kYV6KoAmCF7aKVK4FAFPILYtk32TSkQHd/JnGgFypp9YbdQYZHhdWN/hKV6Y/CNkmeXM7wPNAz/7YN6BnKinbZZn8Uz1EhMAXg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linuxfoundation.org header.i=@linuxfoundation.org header.b=rFtkQ41J; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linuxfoundation.org header.i=@linuxfoundation.org header.b="rFtkQ41J" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B355FC433C7; Sat, 3 Feb 2024 04:10:40 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=korg; t=1706933440; bh=xku+5UeQZdn5rH3qR8vSFbP4fgNaE1vVkJeeNz9X+Yo=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=rFtkQ41Jq1A+4F/OEi7Zn0NQexCbsn9c/Efk76N+B9+lCKleaxdANNiBHVLLsrSZQ NI2mnFGgRtRBps9cTqrKPBLjZfXAPMjzkvHJrh80lCwg0owSKqZeCmH4YvMWg+u1BB rdF/BmM8r8XU4tTX6uMRS1Xlhcj++TYZlm3ZGeLI= From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: stable@vger.kernel.org Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , patches@lists.linux.dev, Felix Kuehling , Philip Yang , Alex Deucher , Sasha Levin Subject: [PATCH 6.1 171/219] drm/amdkfd: Fix lock dependency warning Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2024 20:05:44 -0800 Message-ID: <20240203035340.728159750@linuxfoundation.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.43.0 In-Reply-To: <20240203035317.354186483@linuxfoundation.org> References: <20240203035317.354186483@linuxfoundation.org> User-Agent: quilt/0.67 X-stable: review X-Patchwork-Hint: ignore Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 6.1-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. ------------------ From: Felix Kuehling [ Upstream commit 47bf0f83fc86df1bf42b385a91aadb910137c5c9 ] ====================================================== WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected 6.5.0-kfd-fkuehlin #276 Not tainted ------------------------------------------------------ kworker/8:2/2676 is trying to acquire lock: ffff9435aae95c88 ((work_completion)(&svm_bo->eviction_work)){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: __flush_work+0x52/0x550 but task is already holding lock: ffff9435cd8e1720 (&svms->lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: svm_range_deferred_list_work+0xe8/0x340 [amdgpu] which lock already depends on the new lock. the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is: -> #2 (&svms->lock){+.+.}-{3:3}: __mutex_lock+0x97/0xd30 kfd_ioctl_alloc_memory_of_gpu+0x6d/0x3c0 [amdgpu] kfd_ioctl+0x1b2/0x5d0 [amdgpu] __x64_sys_ioctl+0x86/0xc0 do_syscall_64+0x39/0x80 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd -> #1 (&mm->mmap_lock){++++}-{3:3}: down_read+0x42/0x160 svm_range_evict_svm_bo_worker+0x8b/0x340 [amdgpu] process_one_work+0x27a/0x540 worker_thread+0x53/0x3e0 kthread+0xeb/0x120 ret_from_fork+0x31/0x50 ret_from_fork_asm+0x11/0x20 -> #0 ((work_completion)(&svm_bo->eviction_work)){+.+.}-{0:0}: __lock_acquire+0x1426/0x2200 lock_acquire+0xc1/0x2b0 __flush_work+0x80/0x550 __cancel_work_timer+0x109/0x190 svm_range_bo_release+0xdc/0x1c0 [amdgpu] svm_range_free+0x175/0x180 [amdgpu] svm_range_deferred_list_work+0x15d/0x340 [amdgpu] process_one_work+0x27a/0x540 worker_thread+0x53/0x3e0 kthread+0xeb/0x120 ret_from_fork+0x31/0x50 ret_from_fork_asm+0x11/0x20 other info that might help us debug this: Chain exists of: (work_completion)(&svm_bo->eviction_work) --> &mm->mmap_lock --> &svms->lock Possible unsafe locking scenario: CPU0 CPU1 ---- ---- lock(&svms->lock); lock(&mm->mmap_lock); lock(&svms->lock); lock((work_completion)(&svm_bo->eviction_work)); I believe this cannot really lead to a deadlock in practice, because svm_range_evict_svm_bo_worker only takes the mmap_read_lock if the BO refcount is non-0. That means it's impossible that svm_range_bo_release is running concurrently. However, there is no good way to annotate this. To avoid the problem, take a BO reference in svm_range_schedule_evict_svm_bo instead of in the worker. That way it's impossible for a BO to get freed while eviction work is pending and the cancel_work_sync call in svm_range_bo_release can be eliminated. v2: Use svm_bo_ref_unless_zero and explained why that's safe. Also removed redundant checks that are already done in amdkfd_fence_enable_signaling. Signed-off-by: Felix Kuehling Reviewed-by: Philip Yang Signed-off-by: Alex Deucher Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin --- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_svm.c | 26 ++++++++++---------------- 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_svm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_svm.c index 208812512d8a..4ecc4be1a910 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_svm.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_svm.c @@ -380,14 +380,9 @@ static void svm_range_bo_release(struct kref *kref) spin_lock(&svm_bo->list_lock); } spin_unlock(&svm_bo->list_lock); - if (!dma_fence_is_signaled(&svm_bo->eviction_fence->base)) { - /* We're not in the eviction worker. - * Signal the fence and synchronize with any - * pending eviction work. - */ + if (!dma_fence_is_signaled(&svm_bo->eviction_fence->base)) + /* We're not in the eviction worker. Signal the fence. */ dma_fence_signal(&svm_bo->eviction_fence->base); - cancel_work_sync(&svm_bo->eviction_work); - } dma_fence_put(&svm_bo->eviction_fence->base); amdgpu_bo_unref(&svm_bo->bo); kfree(svm_bo); @@ -3310,13 +3305,14 @@ svm_range_trigger_migration(struct mm_struct *mm, struct svm_range *prange, int svm_range_schedule_evict_svm_bo(struct amdgpu_amdkfd_fence *fence) { - if (!fence) - return -EINVAL; - - if (dma_fence_is_signaled(&fence->base)) - return 0; - - if (fence->svm_bo) { + /* Dereferencing fence->svm_bo is safe here because the fence hasn't + * signaled yet and we're under the protection of the fence->lock. + * After the fence is signaled in svm_range_bo_release, we cannot get + * here any more. + * + * Reference is dropped in svm_range_evict_svm_bo_worker. + */ + if (svm_bo_ref_unless_zero(fence->svm_bo)) { WRITE_ONCE(fence->svm_bo->evicting, 1); schedule_work(&fence->svm_bo->eviction_work); } @@ -3331,8 +3327,6 @@ static void svm_range_evict_svm_bo_worker(struct work_struct *work) int r = 0; svm_bo = container_of(work, struct svm_range_bo, eviction_work); - if (!svm_bo_ref_unless_zero(svm_bo)) - return; /* svm_bo was freed while eviction was pending */ if (mmget_not_zero(svm_bo->eviction_fence->mm)) { mm = svm_bo->eviction_fence->mm; -- 2.43.0