[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c773894a-b011-2419-683a-3b851583fc73@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2020 12:24:52 -0500
From: Dennis Dalessandro <dennis.dalessandro@...el.com>
To: Madhuparna Bhowmik <madhuparnabhowmik04@...il.com>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
Cc: mike.marciniszyn@...el.com,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
Amol Grover <frextrite@...il.com>,
linux-kernel-mentees@...ts.linuxfoundation.org,
rcu@...r.kernel.org, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] infiniband: hw: hfi1: verbs.c: Use built-in RCU list
checking
On 2/14/2020 10:43 AM, Madhuparna Bhowmik wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 12:05 AM <madhuparnabhowmik04@...il.com
> <mailto:madhuparnabhowmik04@...il.com>> wrote:
>
> From: Dennis Dalessandro <dennis.dalessandro@...el.com
> <mailto:dennis.dalessandro@...el.com>>
>
> On 1/14/2020 12:00 PM, Dennis Dalessandro wrote:
> > On 1/14/2020 11:57 AM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> >> On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 09:53:45PM +0530,
> >> madhuparnabhowmik04@...il.com
> <mailto:madhuparnabhowmik04@...il.com> wrote:
> >>> From: Madhuparna Bhowmik <madhuparnabhowmik04@...il.com
> <mailto:madhuparnabhowmik04@...il.com>>
> >>>
> >>> list_for_each_entry_rcu has built-in RCU and lock checking.
> >>> Pass cond argument to list_for_each_entry_rcu.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Madhuparna Bhowmik
> <madhuparnabhowmik04@...il.com <mailto:madhuparnabhowmik04@...il.com>>
> >>> drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/verbs.c | 2 +-
> >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/verbs.c
> >>> b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/verbs.c
> >>> index 089e201d7550..22f2d4fd2577 100644
> >>> +++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/verbs.c
> >>> @@ -515,7 +515,7 @@ static inline void hfi1_handle_packet(struct
> >>> hfi1_packet *packet,
> >>> opa_get_lid(packet->dlid, 9B));
> >>> if (!mcast)
> >>> goto drop;
> >>> - list_for_each_entry_rcu(p, &mcast->qp_list, list) {
> >>> + list_for_each_entry_rcu(p, &mcast->qp_list, list,
> >>> lockdep_is_held(&(ibp->rvp.lock))) {
> >>
> >> Okay, this looks reasonable
> >>
> >> Mike, Dennis, is this the right lock to test?
> >>
> >
> > I'm looking at that right now actually, I don't think this is
> correct.
> > Wanted to talk to Mike before I send a response though.
> >
> > -Denny
>
> That's definitely going to throw a ton of lock dep messages. It's not
> really the right lock either. Instead what we probably need to do is
> what we do in the non-multicast part of the code and take the
> rcu_read_lock().
>
> I'd say hold off on this and we'll fix it right. Same goes for the
> qib one.
>
> Alright, thank you for reviewing.
>
> The rdmavt one though looks to be OK. I'll give it a test.
>
> Hi,
> I just wanted to follow up on this.
> Any updates?
> Also, is the bug fixed now?
>
> Thank you,
> Madhuparna
>
> Thank you,
> Madhuparna
>
> -Denny
>
I've got a patch going through internal discussion and testing for
adding rcu read locking.
The RDMAVT patch, I was OK with going in, I guess I just mentioned that
in a reply rather than adding an RB tag. Let me go ahead and do that.
-Denny
Powered by blists - more mailing lists