[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20cfea36-a8cc-7bd1-9604-57efdf4710e2@daenzer.net>
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2021 15:50:53 +0100
From: Michel Dänzer <michel@...nzer.net>
To: Christian König <ckoenig.leichtzumerken@...il.com>,
Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>
Cc: linaro-mm-sig@...ts.linaro.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-media@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH] dma-buf/poll: Get a file reference for
outstanding fence callbacks
On 2021-07-23 10:22, Christian König wrote:
> Am 23.07.21 um 10:19 schrieb Michel Dänzer:
>> On 2021-07-23 10:04 a.m., Christian König wrote:
>>> Am 23.07.21 um 09:58 schrieb Michel Dänzer:
>>>> From: Michel Dänzer <mdaenzer@...hat.com>
>>>>
>>>> This makes sure we don't hit the
>>>>
>>>> BUG_ON(dmabuf->cb_in.active || dmabuf->cb_out.active);
>>>>
>>>> in dma_buf_release, which could be triggered by user space closing the
>>>> dma-buf file description while there are outstanding fence callbacks
>>>> from dma_buf_poll.
>>> I was also wondering the same thing while working on this, but then thought that the poll interface would take care of this.
>> I was able to hit the BUG_ON with https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/mutter/-/merge_requests/1880 .
>>
>>
>>>> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
>>>> Signed-off-by: Michel Dänzer <mdaenzer@...hat.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/dma-buf/dma-buf.c | 18 ++++++++++++------
>>>> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-buf.c b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-buf.c
>>>> index 6c520c9bd93c..ec25498a971f 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-buf.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-buf.c
>>>> @@ -65,12 +65,9 @@ static void dma_buf_release(struct dentry *dentry)
>>>> BUG_ON(dmabuf->vmapping_counter);
>>>> /*
>>>> - * Any fences that a dma-buf poll can wait on should be signaled
>>>> - * before releasing dma-buf. This is the responsibility of each
>>>> - * driver that uses the reservation objects.
>>>> - *
>>>> - * If you hit this BUG() it means someone dropped their ref to the
>>>> - * dma-buf while still having pending operation to the buffer.
>>>> + * If you hit this BUG() it could mean:
>>>> + * * There's a file reference imbalance in dma_buf_poll / dma_buf_poll_cb or somewhere else
>>>> + * * dmabuf->cb_in/out.active are non-0 despite no pending fence callback
>>>> */
>>>> BUG_ON(dmabuf->cb_in.active || dmabuf->cb_out.active);
>>>> @@ -196,6 +193,7 @@ static loff_t dma_buf_llseek(struct file *file, loff_t offset, int whence)
>>>> static void dma_buf_poll_cb(struct dma_fence *fence, struct dma_fence_cb *cb)
>>>> {
>>>> struct dma_buf_poll_cb_t *dcb = (struct dma_buf_poll_cb_t *)cb;
>>>> + struct dma_buf *dmabuf = container_of(dcb->poll, struct dma_buf, poll);
>>>> unsigned long flags;
>>>> spin_lock_irqsave(&dcb->poll->lock, flags);
>>>> @@ -203,6 +201,8 @@ static void dma_buf_poll_cb(struct dma_fence *fence, struct dma_fence_cb *cb)
>>>> dcb->active = 0;
>>>> spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dcb->poll->lock, flags);
>>>> dma_fence_put(fence);
>>>> + /* Paired with get_file in dma_buf_poll */
>>>> + fput(dmabuf->file);
>>> Is calling fput() in interrupt context ok? IIRC that could potentially sleep.
>> Looks fine AFAICT: It has
>>
>> if (likely(!in_interrupt() && !(task->flags & PF_KTHREAD))) {
>>
>> and as a fallback for that, it adds the file to a lock-less delayed_fput_list which is processed by a workqueue.
>
> Ah, yes that makes sense.
>
> Fell free to add Reviewed-by: Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>
Thanks! AFAICT this fix can be merged now for 5.16?
--
Earthling Michel Dänzer | https://redhat.com
Libre software enthusiast | Mesa and Xwayland developer
Powered by blists - more mailing lists