linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] scsi: ufs: core: Fix &hwq->cq

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: <8948f2b1-e11f-8f84-62e7-e5b13be587b4@acm.org>
Date:   Mon, 24 Apr 2023 09:49:13 -0700
From:   Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
To:     Alice Chao <alice.chao@...iatek.com>,
        Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>,
        Avri Altman <avri.altman@....com>,
        "James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>,
        "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
        AngeloGioacchino Del Regno 
        <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>,
        Can Guo <quic_cang@...cinc.com>,
        Asutosh Das <quic_asutoshd@...cinc.com>,
        Stanley Chu <stanley.chu@...iatek.com>,
        Manivannan Sadhasivam <mani@...nel.org>
Cc:     peter.wang@...iatek.com, chun-hung.wu@...iatek.com,
        powen.kao@...iatek.com, naomi.chu@...iatek.com,
        cc.chou@...iatek.com, chaotian.jing@...iatek.com,
        jiajie.hao@...iatek.com, tun-yu.yu@...iatek.com,
        eddie.huang@...iatek.com, wsd_upstream@...iatek.com,
        linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] scsi: ufs: core: Fix &hwq->cq_lock deadlock issue

On 4/24/23 01:03, Alice Chao wrote:
> [name:lockdep&]WARNING: inconsistent lock state
> [name:lockdep&]--------------------------------
> [name:lockdep&]inconsistent {IN-HARDIRQ-W} -> {HARDIRQ-ON-W} usage.
> [name:lockdep&]kworker/u16:4/260 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE1:SE1] takes:
>    ffffff8028444600 (&hwq->cq_lock){?.-.}-{2:2}, at:
> ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_lock+0x30/0xe0
> [name:lockdep&]{IN-HARDIRQ-W} state was registered at:
>    lock_acquire+0x17c/0x33c
>    _raw_spin_lock+0x5c/0x7c
>    ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_lock+0x30/0xe0
>    ufs_mtk_mcq_intr+0x60/0x1bc [ufs_mediatek_mod]
>    __handle_irq_event_percpu+0x140/0x3ec
>    handle_irq_event+0x50/0xd8
>    handle_fasteoi_irq+0x148/0x2b0
>    generic_handle_domain_irq+0x4c/0x6c
>    gic_handle_irq+0x58/0x134
>    call_on_irq_stack+0x40/0x74
>    do_interrupt_handler+0x84/0xe4
>    el1_interrupt+0x3c/0x78
> <snip>
> 
> Possible unsafe locking scenario:
>         CPU0
>         ----
>    lock(&hwq->cq_lock);
>    <Interrupt>
>      lock(&hwq->cq_lock);
>    *** DEADLOCK ***
> 2 locks held by kworker/u16:4/260:
> 
> [name:lockdep&]
>   stack backtrace:
> CPU: 7 PID: 260 Comm: kworker/u16:4 Tainted: G S      W  OE
> 6.1.17-mainline-android14-2-g277223301adb #1
> Workqueue: ufs_eh_wq_0 ufshcd_err_handler
> 
>   Call trace:
>    dump_backtrace+0x10c/0x160
>    show_stack+0x20/0x30
>    dump_stack_lvl+0x98/0xd8
>    dump_stack+0x20/0x60
>    print_usage_bug+0x584/0x76c
>    mark_lock_irq+0x488/0x510
>    mark_lock+0x1ec/0x25c
>    __lock_acquire+0x4d8/0xffc
>    lock_acquire+0x17c/0x33c
>    _raw_spin_lock+0x5c/0x7c
>    ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_lock+0x30/0xe0
>    ufshcd_poll+0x68/0x1b0
>    ufshcd_transfer_req_compl+0x9c/0xc8
>    ufshcd_err_handler+0x3bc/0xea0
>    process_one_work+0x2f4/0x7e8
>    worker_thread+0x234/0x450
>    kthread+0x110/0x134
>    ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20
> 
> ufs_mtk_mcq_intr() could refer to
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230328103423.10970-3-powen.kao@mediatek.com/
> 
> When ufshcd_err_handler() is executed, CQ event interrupt can enter
> waiting for the same lock. It could happened in upstream code path
> ufshcd_handle_mcq_cq_events() and also in ufs_mtk_mcq_intr(). This
> warning message will be generated when &hwq->cq_lock is used in IRQ
> context with IRQ enabled. Use ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_lock() with
> spin_lock_irqsave instead of spin_lock to resolve the deadlock issue.

For future patches, please make sure that the patch description occurs 
before the call traces. Anyway:

Reviewed-by: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>