[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20231019142956.00005a3b@huawei.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2023 14:30:16 +0100
From: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
To: Junhao He <hejunhao3@...wei.com>, <linuxarm@...wei.com>
CC: <suzuki.poulose@....com>, <james.clark@....com>,
<coresight@...ts.linaro.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <jonathan.cameron@...wei.com>,
<yangyicong@...wei.com>, <prime.zeng@...ilicon.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] coresight: ultrasoc-smb: fix sleep while close
preempt in enable_smb
On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 17:47:04 +0800
Junhao He <hejunhao3@...wei.com> wrote:
> When we to enable the SMB by perf, the perf sched will call perf_ctx_lock()
> to close system preempt in event_function_call(). But SMB::enable_smb() use
> mutex to lock the critical section, which may sleep.
>
> BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/locking/mutex.c:580
> in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 1, non_block: 0, pid: 153023, name: perf
> preempt_count: 2, expected: 0
> RCU nest depth: 0, expected: 0
> INFO: lockdep is turned off.
> irq event stamp: 0
> hardirqs last enabled at (0): [<0000000000000000>] 0x0
> hardirqs last disabled at (0): [<ffffa2983f5c5f40>] copy_process+0xae8/0x2b48
> softirqs last enabled at (0): [<ffffa2983f5c5f40>] copy_process+0xae8/0x2b48
> softirqs last disabled at (0): [<0000000000000000>] 0x0
> CPU: 2 PID: 153023 Comm: perf Kdump: loaded Tainted: G W O 6.5.0-rc4+ #1
>
> Call trace:
> ...
> __mutex_lock+0xbc/0xa70
> mutex_lock_nested+0x34/0x48
> smb_update_buffer+0x58/0x360 [ultrasoc_smb]
> etm_event_stop+0x204/0x2d8 [coresight]
> etm_event_del+0x1c/0x30 [coresight]
> event_sched_out+0x17c/0x3b8
> group_sched_out.part.0+0x5c/0x208
> __perf_event_disable+0x15c/0x210
> event_function+0xe0/0x230
> remote_function+0xb4/0xe8
> generic_exec_single+0x160/0x268
> smp_call_function_single+0x20c/0x2a0
> event_function_call+0x20c/0x220
> _perf_event_disable+0x5c/0x90
> perf_event_for_each_child+0x58/0xc0
> _perf_ioctl+0x34c/0x1250
> perf_ioctl+0x64/0x98
> ...
>
> Use spinlock replace mutex to control driver data access to one at a
> time. But the function copy_to_user() may sleep so spinlock do not to
> lock it.
I'd like to see a comment on why we no longer need to lock over the copy_to_user
rather than simply that we can't.
>
> Fixes: 06f5c2926aaa ("drivers/coresight: Add UltraSoc System Memory Buffer driver")
> Signed-off-by: Junhao He <hejunhao3@...wei.com>
A follow up patch could change a lot of this to use the new cleanup.h (don't want that
in the fix though as will make back porting trickier.).
That should let you do
guard(spin_lock)(&drvdata->spinlock);
and then use direct returns instead of goto complexity.
Jonathan
> @@ -132,10 +132,8 @@ static ssize_t smb_read(struct file *file, char __user *data, size_t len,
> if (!len)
> return 0;
>
> - mutex_lock(&drvdata->mutex);
> -
> if (!sdb->data_size)
> - goto out;
> + return 0;
>
> to_copy = min(sdb->data_size, len);
>
> @@ -145,20 +143,18 @@ static ssize_t smb_read(struct file *file, char __user *data, size_t len,
>
> if (copy_to_user(data, sdb->buf_base + sdb->buf_rdptr, to_copy)) {
> dev_dbg(dev, "Failed to copy data to user\n");
> - to_copy = -EFAULT;
> - goto out;
> + return -EFAULT;
> }
>
> + spin_lock(&drvdata->spinlock);
> *ppos += to_copy;
> -
Unrelated white space change that shouldn't be here.
> smb_update_read_ptr(drvdata, to_copy);
>
> - dev_dbg(dev, "%zu bytes copied\n", to_copy);
> -out:
> if (!sdb->data_size)
> smb_reset_buffer(drvdata);
> - mutex_unlock(&drvdata->mutex);
> + spin_unlock(&drvdata->spinlock);
>
> + dev_dbg(dev, "%zu bytes copied\n", to_copy);
> return to_copy;
> }
Powered by blists - more mailing lists