linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 04/14] drm/msm: Add priv->mm_lock to protect active/inactive lists

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAF6AEGv49O97YQXJeUYzxRDUTE8fhtRKeKT6RXaEcJUo79mXQw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sun, 4 Oct 2020 17:10:47 -0700
From:   Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com>
To:     Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>
Cc:     dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        Rob Clark <robdclark@...omium.org>,
        Sean Paul <sean@...rly.run>, David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
        "open list:DRM DRIVER FOR MSM ADRENO GPU" 
        <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:DRM DRIVER FOR MSM ADRENO GPU" 
        <freedreno@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/14] drm/msm: Add priv->mm_lock to protect
 active/inactive lists

On Sun, Oct 4, 2020 at 3:15 PM Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Oct 4, 2020 at 9:21 PM Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > From: Rob Clark <robdclark@...omium.org>
> >
> > Rather than relying on the big dev->struct_mutex hammer, introduce a
> > more specific lock for protecting the bo lists.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Rob Clark <robdclark@...omium.org>
> > ---
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_debugfs.c      |  7 +++++++
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.c          |  1 +
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.h          | 13 +++++++++++-
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_gem.c          | 28 +++++++++++++++-----------
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_gem_shrinker.c | 12 +++++++++++
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_gpu.h          |  5 ++++-
> >  6 files changed, 52 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_debugfs.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_debugfs.c
> > index ee2e270f464c..64afbed89821 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_debugfs.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_debugfs.c
> > @@ -112,6 +112,11 @@ static int msm_gem_show(struct drm_device *dev, struct seq_file *m)
> >  {
> >         struct msm_drm_private *priv = dev->dev_private;
> >         struct msm_gpu *gpu = priv->gpu;
> > +       int ret;
> > +
> > +       ret = mutex_lock_interruptible(&priv->mm_lock);
> > +       if (ret)
> > +               return ret;
> >
> >         if (gpu) {
> >                 seq_printf(m, "Active Objects (%s):\n", gpu->name);
> > @@ -121,6 +126,8 @@ static int msm_gem_show(struct drm_device *dev, struct seq_file *m)
> >         seq_printf(m, "Inactive Objects:\n");
> >         msm_gem_describe_objects(&priv->inactive_list, m);
> >
> > +       mutex_unlock(&priv->mm_lock);
> > +
> >         return 0;
> >  }
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.c
> > index 49685571dc0e..dc6efc089285 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.c
> > @@ -441,6 +441,7 @@ static int msm_drm_init(struct device *dev, struct drm_driver *drv)
> >         init_llist_head(&priv->free_list);
> >
> >         INIT_LIST_HEAD(&priv->inactive_list);
> > +       mutex_init(&priv->mm_lock);
>
> I highly recommend you drop a
>
> fs_reclaim_acquire(GFP_KERNEL);
> might_lock(&priv->mm_lock);
> fs_reclaim_release(GFP_KERNEL);
>
> in here to teach lockdep about your ordering against the shrinker.
> Gives you full testing every boot, even if your shrinker never gets
> called.

Good idea..

(tbf, I have tested this with android+lockdep which pretty is great
shrinker exercise.. but immediate notification of future problems is a
good plan)

BR,
-R