| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20190616070914.GA4464@kroah.com>
Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2019 09:09:14 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
Scott Wood <swood@...hat.com>, Wu Hao <hao.wu@...el.com>,
Alan Tull <atull@...nel.org>, linux-fpga@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL 5.1 16/59] fpga: dfl: Add lockdep classes for
pdata->lock
On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 06:41:59PM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 07:47:39AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 04:28:00PM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
> > > From: Scott Wood <swood@...hat.com>
> > >
> > > [ Upstream commit dfe3de8d397bf878b31864d4e489d41118ec475f ]
> > >
> > > struct dfl_feature_platform_data (and it's mutex) is used
> > > by both fme and port devices, and when lockdep is enabled it
> > > complains about nesting between these locks. Tell lockdep about
> > > the difference so it can track each class separately.
> > >
> > > Here's the lockdep complaint:
> > > [ 409.680668] WARNING: possible recursive locking detected
> > > [ 409.685983] 5.1.0-rc3.fpga+ #1 Tainted: G E
> > > [ 409.691469] --------------------------------------------
> > > [ 409.696779] fpgaconf/9348 is trying to acquire lock:
> > > [ 409.701746] 00000000a443fe2e (&pdata->lock){+.+.}, at: port_enable_set+0x24/0x60 [dfl_afu]
> > > [ 409.710006]
> > > [ 409.710006] but task is already holding lock:
> > > [ 409.715837] 0000000063b78782 (&pdata->lock){+.+.}, at: fme_pr_ioctl+0x21d/0x330 [dfl_fme]
> > > [ 409.724012]
> > > [ 409.724012] other info that might help us debug this:
> > > [ 409.730535] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
> > > [ 409.730535]
> > > [ 409.736457] CPU0
> > > [ 409.738910] ----
> > > [ 409.741360] lock(&pdata->lock);
> > > [ 409.744679] lock(&pdata->lock);
> > > [ 409.747999]
> > > [ 409.747999] *** DEADLOCK ***
> > > [ 409.747999]
> > > [ 409.753920] May be due to missing lock nesting notation
> > > [ 409.753920]
> > > [ 409.760704] 4 locks held by fpgaconf/9348:
> > > [ 409.764805] #0: 0000000063b78782 (&pdata->lock){+.+.}, at: fme_pr_ioctl+0x21d/0x330 [dfl_fme]
> > > [ 409.773408] #1: 00000000213c8a66 (®ion->mutex){+.+.}, at: fpga_region_program_fpga+0x24/0x200 [fpga_region]
> > > [ 409.783489] #2: 00000000fe63afb9 (&mgr->ref_mutex){+.+.}, at: fpga_mgr_lock+0x15/0x40 [fpga_mgr]
> > > [ 409.792354] #3: 000000000b2285c5 (&bridge->mutex){+.+.}, at: __fpga_bridge_get+0x26/0xa0 [fpga_bridge]
> > > [ 409.801740]
> > > [ 409.801740] stack backtrace:
> > > [ 409.806102] CPU: 45 PID: 9348 Comm: fpgaconf Kdump: loaded Tainted: G E 5.1.0-rc3.fpga+ #1
> > > [ 409.815658] Hardware name: Intel Corporation S2600BT/S2600BT, BIOS SE5C620.86B.01.00.0763.022420181017 02/24/2018
> > > [ 409.825911] Call Trace:
> > > [ 409.828369] dump_stack+0x5e/0x8b
> > > [ 409.831686] __lock_acquire+0xf3d/0x10e0
> > > [ 409.835612] ? find_held_lock+0x3c/0xa0
> > > [ 409.839451] lock_acquire+0xbc/0x1d0
> > > [ 409.843030] ? port_enable_set+0x24/0x60 [dfl_afu]
> > > [ 409.847823] ? port_enable_set+0x24/0x60 [dfl_afu]
> > > [ 409.852616] __mutex_lock+0x86/0x970
> > > [ 409.856195] ? port_enable_set+0x24/0x60 [dfl_afu]
> > > [ 409.860989] ? port_enable_set+0x24/0x60 [dfl_afu]
> > > [ 409.865777] ? __mutex_unlock_slowpath+0x4b/0x290
> > > [ 409.870486] port_enable_set+0x24/0x60 [dfl_afu]
> > > [ 409.875106] fpga_bridges_disable+0x36/0x50 [fpga_bridge]
> > > [ 409.880502] fpga_region_program_fpga+0xea/0x200 [fpga_region]
> > > [ 409.886338] fme_pr_ioctl+0x13e/0x330 [dfl_fme]
> > > [ 409.890870] fme_ioctl+0x66/0xe0 [dfl_fme]
> > > [ 409.894973] do_vfs_ioctl+0xa9/0x720
> > > [ 409.898548] ? lockdep_hardirqs_on+0xf0/0x1a0
> > > [ 409.902907] ksys_ioctl+0x60/0x90
> > > [ 409.906225] __x64_sys_ioctl+0x16/0x20
> > > [ 409.909981] do_syscall_64+0x5a/0x220
> > > [ 409.913644] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x49/0xbe
> > > [ 409.918698] RIP: 0033:0x7f9d31b9b8d7
> > > [ 409.922276] Code: 44 00 00 48 8b 05 b9 15 2d 00 64 c7 00 26 00 00 00 48 c7 c0 ff ff ff ff c3 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 b8 10 00 00 00 0f 05 <48> 3d 01 f0 ff ff 73 01 c3 48 8b 0d 89 15 2d 00 f7 d8 64 89 01 48
> > > [ 409.941020] RSP: 002b:00007ffe4cae0d68 EFLAGS: 00000202 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000010
> > > [ 409.948588] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00007f9d32ade6a0 RCX: 00007f9d31b9b8d7
> > > [ 409.955719] RDX: 00007ffe4cae0df0 RSI: 000000000000b680 RDI: 0000000000000003
> > > [ 409.962852] RBP: 0000000000000003 R08: 00007f9d2b70a177 R09: 00007ffe4cae0e40
> > > [ 409.969984] R10: 00007ffe4cae0160 R11: 0000000000000202 R12: 00007ffe4cae0df0
> > > [ 409.977115] R13: 000000000000b680 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: 00007ffe4cae0f60
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Scott Wood <swood@...hat.com>
> > > Acked-by: Wu Hao <hao.wu@...el.com>
> > > Acked-by: Alan Tull <atull@...nel.org>
> > > Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
> > > Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/fpga/dfl.c | 16 +++++++++++++++-
> > > 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > Adding lockdep stuff is not really needed for stable kernels, please
> > drop this from all trees.
>
> For actual splats? Why? I treat them as compiler warnings. Keeping these
> around will just make them show up over and over in testing (at least
> until we unify our testing story...).
Ah, good point, ok, leave this in :)
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists