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: <CACVXFVMcgMzwHrvimn2awQZCPP2m=_npTGap-m7Ru+jdCoqcyA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 7 Mar 2013 10:03:52 +0800
From:	Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>
To:	Or Gerlitz <or.gerlitz@...il.com>
Cc:	Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Roland Dreier <roland@...nel.org>,
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Yan Burman <yanb@...lanox.com>,
	Jack Morgenstein <jackm@....mellanox.co.il>,
	Liran Liss <liranl@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: hitting lockdep warning as of too early VF probe with 3.9-rc1

On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 4:54 AM, Or Gerlitz <or.gerlitz@...il.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 4:43 AM, Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com> wrote:
>> You are adding one new PCI device inside another PCI device's probe(),
>> so the new device will be probed, since PCI probe() is scheduled by
>> work_on_cpu, then cause flush_work() called inside worker function,
>> which might be a real deadlock.
>
> So if I understand correct, you recommend to somehow avoid this nested probing?

Yes, you might need to avoid the nested probing in your driver.

>
>> I am wondering why this commit can cause the problem, since the PCI
>> device will be probed with its driver if there is one driver for it. There is no
>> any limit on when the driver should be loaded into system, either before
>> device is added or after.
>
> FWIW to undertstanding the issue - the same driver (mlx4_core) is used
> by the PF and VF, so the VF driver is already loaded at the time its
> been added as new PCI device.
>
>> From driver core view, looks no wrong things are found.
>
> So this got me confused, you pointed on possible deadlock, are you
> saying the deadlock wouldn't be the result of how the driver code is
> going nor the commited we bisected?

My commit only affects the driver loading path, but your warning
is hit in driver probe path triggered by device addition, so the lockdep
warning should still be triggered without my commit since the two paths
are totally independent, right?

Thanks,
--
Ming Lei
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ