[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87blc192cz.fsf@codeaurora.org>
Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2021 14:17:16 +0200
From: Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>
To: "Coelho\, Luciano" <luciano.coelho@...el.com>
Cc: "jikos\@kernel.org" <jikos@...nel.org>,
"johannes\@sipsolutions.net" <johannes@...solutions.net>,
"linux-wireless\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
"hkallweit1\@gmail.com" <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
"linux-kernel\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] iwlwifi: don't call netif_napi_add() with rxq->lock held (was Re: Lockdep warning in iwl_pcie_rx_handle())
"Coelho, Luciano" <luciano.coelho@...el.com> writes:
> On Tue, 2021-03-02 at 11:34 +0100, Jiri Kosina wrote:
>> From: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
>>
>> We can't call netif_napi_add() with rxq-lock held, as there is a potential
>> for deadlock as spotted by lockdep (see below). rxq->lock is not
>> protecting anything over the netif_napi_add() codepath anyway, so let's
>> drop it just before calling into NAPI.
>>
>> ========================================================
>> WARNING: possible irq lock inversion dependency detected
>> 5.12.0-rc1-00002-gbada49429032 #5 Not tainted
>> --------------------------------------------------------
>> irq/136-iwlwifi/565 just changed the state of lock:
>> ffff89f28433b0b0 (&rxq->lock){+.-.}-{2:2}, at:
>> iwl_pcie_rx_handle+0x7f/0x960 [iwlwifi]
>> but this lock took another, SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock in the past:
>> (napi_hash_lock){+.+.}-{2:2}
>>
>> and interrupts could create inverse lock ordering between them.
>>
>> other info that might help us debug this:
>> Possible interrupt unsafe locking scenario:
>>
>> CPU0 CPU1
>> ---- ----
>> lock(napi_hash_lock);
>> local_irq_disable();
>> lock(&rxq->lock);
>> lock(napi_hash_lock);
>> <Interrupt>
>> lock(&rxq->lock);
>>
>> *** DEADLOCK ***
>>
>> 1 lock held by irq/136-iwlwifi/565:
>> #0: ffff89f2b1440170 (sync_cmd_lockdep_map){+.+.}-{0:0}, at:
>> iwl_pcie_irq_handler+0x5/0xb30
>>
>> the shortest dependencies between 2nd lock and 1st lock:
>> -> (napi_hash_lock){+.+.}-{2:2} {
>> HARDIRQ-ON-W at:
>> lock_acquire+0x277/0x3d0
>> _raw_spin_lock+0x2c/0x40
>> netif_napi_add+0x14b/0x270
>> e1000_probe+0x2fe/0xee0 [e1000e]
>> local_pci_probe+0x42/0x90
>> pci_device_probe+0x10b/0x1c0
>> really_probe+0xef/0x4b0
>> driver_probe_device+0xde/0x150
>> device_driver_attach+0x4f/0x60
>> __driver_attach+0x9c/0x140
>> bus_for_each_dev+0x79/0xc0
>> bus_add_driver+0x18d/0x220
>> driver_register+0x5b/0xf0
>> do_one_initcall+0x5b/0x300
>> do_init_module+0x5b/0x21c
>> load_module+0x1dae/0x22c0
>> __do_sys_finit_module+0xad/0x110
>> do_syscall_64+0x33/0x80
>> entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae
>> SOFTIRQ-ON-W at:
>> lock_acquire+0x277/0x3d0
>> _raw_spin_lock+0x2c/0x40
>> netif_napi_add+0x14b/0x270
>> e1000_probe+0x2fe/0xee0 [e1000e]
>> local_pci_probe+0x42/0x90
>> pci_device_probe+0x10b/0x1c0
>> really_probe+0xef/0x4b0
>> driver_probe_device+0xde/0x150
>> device_driver_attach+0x4f/0x60
>> __driver_attach+0x9c/0x140
>> bus_for_each_dev+0x79/0xc0
>> bus_add_driver+0x18d/0x220
>> driver_register+0x5b/0xf0
>> do_one_initcall+0x5b/0x300
>> do_init_module+0x5b/0x21c
>> load_module+0x1dae/0x22c0
>> __do_sys_finit_module+0xad/0x110
>> do_syscall_64+0x33/0x80
>> entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae
>> INITIAL USE at:
>> lock_acquire+0x277/0x3d0
>> _raw_spin_lock+0x2c/0x40
>> netif_napi_add+0x14b/0x270
>> e1000_probe+0x2fe/0xee0 [e1000e]
>> local_pci_probe+0x42/0x90
>> pci_device_probe+0x10b/0x1c0
>> really_probe+0xef/0x4b0
>> driver_probe_device+0xde/0x150
>> device_driver_attach+0x4f/0x60
>> __driver_attach+0x9c/0x140
>> bus_for_each_dev+0x79/0xc0
>> bus_add_driver+0x18d/0x220
>> driver_register+0x5b/0xf0
>> do_one_initcall+0x5b/0x300
>> do_init_module+0x5b/0x21c
>> load_module+0x1dae/0x22c0
>> __do_sys_finit_module+0xad/0x110
>> do_syscall_64+0x33/0x80
>> entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae
>> }
>> ... key at: [<ffffffffae84ef38>] napi_hash_lock+0x18/0x40
>> ... acquired at:
>> _raw_spin_lock+0x2c/0x40
>> netif_napi_add+0x14b/0x270
>> _iwl_pcie_rx_init+0x1f4/0x710 [iwlwifi]
>> iwl_pcie_rx_init+0x1b/0x3b0 [iwlwifi]
>> iwl_trans_pcie_start_fw+0x2ac/0x6a0 [iwlwifi]
>> iwl_mvm_load_ucode_wait_alive+0x116/0x460 [iwlmvm]
>> iwl_run_init_mvm_ucode+0xa4/0x3a0 [iwlmvm]
>> iwl_op_mode_mvm_start+0x9ed/0xbf0 [iwlmvm]
>> _iwl_op_mode_start.isra.4+0x42/0x80 [iwlwifi]
>> iwl_opmode_register+0x71/0xe0 [iwlwifi]
>> iwl_mvm_init+0x34/0x1000 [iwlmvm]
>> do_one_initcall+0x5b/0x300
>> do_init_module+0x5b/0x21c
>> load_module+0x1dae/0x22c0
>> __do_sys_finit_module+0xad/0x110
>> do_syscall_64+0x33/0x80
>> entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae
>>
>> [ ... lockdep output trimmed .... ]
>>
>> Fixes: 25edc8f259c7106 ("iwlwifi: pcie: properly implement NAPI")
>> Signed-off-by: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
>> ---
>>
>> v1->v2: Previous patch was not refreshed against current code-base, sorry.
>>
>> drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/pcie/rx.c | 3 ++-
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
>
> Thanks, Jiri! Let's take your patch since you already sent it out.
>
> Kalle, can you please take this directly to wireless-drivers.git?
>
> Acked-by: Luca Coelho <luciano.coelho@...el.com>
Ok but I don't see this either in patchwork or lore, hopefully it shows
up later.
--
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/
https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches
Powered by blists - more mailing lists