public inbox for stable@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Ionut Nechita (Wind River)" <ionut.nechita@windriver.com>
To: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, bhelgaas@google.com
Cc: helgaas@kernel.org, sebott@linux.ibm.com, schnelle@linux.ibm.com,
	bblock@linux.ibm.com, linux@roeck-us.net, lukas@wunner.de,
	stable@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org, matthew.brost@intel.com,
	michal.wajdeczko@intel.com, piotr.piorkowski@intel.com,
	dtatulea@nvidia.com, mani@kernel.org, kbusch@kernel.org,
	lkml@mageta.org, alifm@linux.ibm.com, julianr@linux.ibm.com,
	ionut_n2001@yahoo.com, sunlightlinux@gmail.com,
	"Ionut Nechita (Wind River)" <ionut.nechita@windriver.com>
Subject: [PATCH v11 1/2] PCI/IOV: Make pci_lock_rescan_remove() reentrant and protect sriov_add_vfs/sriov_del_vfs
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2026 10:35:33 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260326083534.23602-2-ionut.nechita@windriver.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260326083534.23602-1-ionut.nechita@windriver.com>

After reverting commit 05703271c3cd ("PCI/IOV: Add PCI rescan-remove
locking when enabling/disabling SR-IOV") and moving the lock to
sriov_numvfs_store(), the path through driver .remove() (e.g. rmmod,
or manual unbind) that calls pci_disable_sriov() directly remains
unprotected against concurrent hotplug events. This affects any SR-IOV
capable driver that calls pci_disable_sriov() from its .remove()
callback (i40e, ice, mlx5, bnxt, etc.).

On s390, platform-generated hot-unplug events for VFs can race with
sriov_del_vfs() when a PF driver is being unloaded. The platform event
handler takes pci_rescan_remove_lock, but sriov_del_vfs() does not,
leading to double removal and list corruption.

We cannot use a plain mutex_lock() here because sriov_del_vfs() may also
be called from paths that already hold pci_rescan_remove_lock (e.g.
remove_store -> pci_stop_and_remove_bus_device_locked, or
sriov_numvfs_store with the lock taken by the previous patch). Using
mutex_lock() in those cases would deadlock.

Make pci_lock_rescan_remove() itself reentrant using mutex_get_owner()
and a reentrant depth counter, as suggested by Lukas Wunner and
Benjamin Block, since these recursive locking scenarios exist elsewhere
in the PCI subsystem:
 - If the lock is already held by the current task (checked via
   mutex_get_owner()): increments the reentrant counter and returns
   without re-acquiring, avoiding deadlock.
 - If the lock is held by another task: blocks until the lock is
   released, providing complete serialization.
 - If the lock is not held: acquires the mutex normally.

pci_unlock_rescan_remove() decrements the reentrant counter if it is
non-zero, otherwise releases the mutex.

This approach keeps the API unchanged: callers simply pair lock/unlock
calls without needing to track any return value or use separate
reentrant variants.

Add pci_lock_rescan_remove()/pci_unlock_rescan_remove() calls to
sriov_add_vfs() and sriov_del_vfs() to protect VF addition and
removal against concurrent hotplug events.

Remove the rescan/remove locking from sriov_numvfs_store() that was
introduced by commit a5338e365c45 ("PCI/IOV: Fix race between SR-IOV
enable/disable and hotplug"), since the locking is now handled directly
in sriov_add_vfs() and sriov_del_vfs() where it is actually needed,
reducing the lock scope.

Fixes: 18f9e9d150fc ("PCI/IOV: Factor out sriov_add_vfs()")
Fixes: 05703271c3cd ("PCI/IOV: Add PCI rescan-remove locking when enabling/disabling SR-IOV")
Fixes: a5338e365c45 ("PCI/IOV: Fix race between SR-IOV enable/disable and hotplug")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Suggested-by: Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de>
Suggested-by: Benjamin Block <bblock@linux.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: Benjamin Block <bblock@linux.ibm.com>
Tested-by: Benjamin Block <bblock@linux.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: Niklas Schnelle <schnelle@linux.ibm.com>
Tested-by: Niklas Schnelle <schnelle@linux.ibm.com> # s390
Signed-off-by: Ionut Nechita <ionut.nechita@windriver.com>
---
 drivers/pci/iov.c   |  9 +++++----
 drivers/pci/probe.c | 11 +++++++++--
 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/pci/iov.c b/drivers/pci/iov.c
index 91ac4e37ecb9c..7ed902539051e 100644
--- a/drivers/pci/iov.c
+++ b/drivers/pci/iov.c
@@ -495,9 +495,7 @@ static ssize_t sriov_numvfs_store(struct device *dev,
 
 	if (num_vfs == 0) {
 		/* disable VFs */
-		pci_lock_rescan_remove();
 		ret = pdev->driver->sriov_configure(pdev, 0);
-		pci_unlock_rescan_remove();
 		goto exit;
 	}
 
@@ -509,9 +507,7 @@ static ssize_t sriov_numvfs_store(struct device *dev,
 		goto exit;
 	}
 
-	pci_lock_rescan_remove();
 	ret = pdev->driver->sriov_configure(pdev, num_vfs);
-	pci_unlock_rescan_remove();
 	if (ret < 0)
 		goto exit;
 
@@ -633,15 +629,18 @@ static int sriov_add_vfs(struct pci_dev *dev, u16 num_vfs)
 	if (dev->no_vf_scan)
 		return 0;
 
+	pci_lock_rescan_remove();
 	for (i = 0; i < num_vfs; i++) {
 		rc = pci_iov_add_virtfn(dev, i);
 		if (rc)
 			goto failed;
 	}
+	pci_unlock_rescan_remove();
 	return 0;
 failed:
 	while (i--)
 		pci_iov_remove_virtfn(dev, i);
+	pci_unlock_rescan_remove();
 
 	return rc;
 }
@@ -766,8 +765,10 @@ static void sriov_del_vfs(struct pci_dev *dev)
 	struct pci_sriov *iov = dev->sriov;
 	int i;
 
+	pci_lock_rescan_remove();
 	for (i = 0; i < iov->num_VFs; i++)
 		pci_iov_remove_virtfn(dev, i);
+	pci_unlock_rescan_remove();
 }
 
 static void sriov_disable(struct pci_dev *dev)
diff --git a/drivers/pci/probe.c b/drivers/pci/probe.c
index bccc7a4bdd794..ce4d351b5aa21 100644
--- a/drivers/pci/probe.c
+++ b/drivers/pci/probe.c
@@ -3509,16 +3509,23 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pci_rescan_bus);
  * routines should always be executed under this mutex.
  */
 DEFINE_MUTEX(pci_rescan_remove_lock);
+static size_t pci_rescan_remove_reentrant_count;
 
 void pci_lock_rescan_remove(void)
 {
-	mutex_lock(&pci_rescan_remove_lock);
+	if (mutex_get_owner(&pci_rescan_remove_lock) == (unsigned long)current)
+		pci_rescan_remove_reentrant_count++;
+	else
+		mutex_lock(&pci_rescan_remove_lock);
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pci_lock_rescan_remove);
 
 void pci_unlock_rescan_remove(void)
 {
-	mutex_unlock(&pci_rescan_remove_lock);
+	if (pci_rescan_remove_reentrant_count > 0)
+		pci_rescan_remove_reentrant_count--;
+	else
+		mutex_unlock(&pci_rescan_remove_lock);
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pci_unlock_rescan_remove);
 
-- 
2.53.0


  reply	other threads:[~2026-03-26  8:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-03-26  8:35 [PATCH v11 0/2] PCI/IOV: Fix SR-IOV locking races and AB-BA deadlock Ionut Nechita (Wind River)
2026-03-26  8:35 ` Ionut Nechita (Wind River) [this message]
2026-03-26  8:35 ` [PATCH v11 2/2] PCI: Fix AB-BA deadlock between device_lock and pci_rescan_remove_lock in remove_store Ionut Nechita (Wind River)

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=20260326083534.23602-2-ionut.nechita@windriver.com \
    --to=ionut.nechita@windriver.com \
    --cc=alifm@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=bblock@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=dtatulea@nvidia.com \
    --cc=helgaas@kernel.org \
    --cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=ionut_n2001@yahoo.com \
    --cc=julianr@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=kbusch@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@roeck-us.net \
    --cc=lkml@mageta.org \
    --cc=lukas@wunner.de \
    --cc=mani@kernel.org \
    --cc=matthew.brost@intel.com \
    --cc=michal.wajdeczko@intel.com \
    --cc=piotr.piorkowski@intel.com \
    --cc=schnelle@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=sebott@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sunlightlinux@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