Message-ID: <517007F0.4060000@mellanox.com>
Date:	Thu, 18 Apr 2013 17:49:20 +0300
From:	Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>
To:	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
CC:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.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>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
	<linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH repost for-3.9] pci: avoid work_on_cpu for nested SRIOV
 probes

On 18/04/2013 11:33, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 06:43:39AM -0700, Tejun Heo wrote:
>> On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 03:58:55PM +0300, Or Gerlitz wrote:
>>> So the patch eliminated the lockdep warning for mlx4 nested probing
>>> sequence, but introduced lockdep warning for
>>> 00:13.0 PIC: Intel Corporation 7500/5520/5500/X58 I/O Hub I/OxAPIC
>>> Interrupt Controller (rev 22)
>> Oops, the patch in itself doesn't really change anything.  The caller
>> should use a different subclass for the nested invocation, just like
>> spin_lock_nested() and friends.  Sorry about not being clear.
>> Michael, can you please help?
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> -- 
>> tejun
> So like this on top. Tejun, you didn't add your S.O.B and patch
> description, if this helps as we expect they will be needed.
>
> ---->
>
> pci: use work_on_cpu_nested for nested SRIOV
>
> Snce 3.9-rc1 mlx driver started triggering a lockdep warning.
>
> The issue is that a driver, in it's probe function, calls
> pci_sriov_enable so a PF device probe causes VF probe (AKA nested
> probe).  Each probe in pci_device_probe which is (normally) run through
> work_on_cpu (this is to get the right numa node for memory allocated by
> the driver).  In turn work_on_cpu does this internally:
>
>          schedule_work_on(cpu, &wfc.work);
>          flush_work(&wfc.work);
>
> So if you are running probe on CPU1, and cause another
> probe on the same CPU, this will try to flush
> workqueue from inside same workqueue which triggers
> a lockdep warning.
>
> Nested probing might be tricky to get right generally.
>
> But for pci_sriov_enable, the situation is actually very simple:
> VFs almost never use the same driver as the PF so the warning
> is bogus there.
>
> This is hardly elegant as it might shut up some real warnings if a buggy
> driver actually probes itself in a nested way, but looks to me like an
> appropriate quick fix for 3.9.
>
> Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@...hat.com>
>
> ---
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/pci-driver.c b/drivers/pci/pci-driver.c
> index 1fa1e48..9c836ef 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/pci-driver.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/pci-driver.c
> @@ -286,9 +286,9 @@ static int pci_call_probe(struct pci_driver *drv, struct pci_dev *dev,
>   		int cpu;
>   
>   		get_online_cpus();
> -		cpu = cpumask_any_and(cpumask_of_node(node), cpu_online_mask);
> -		if (cpu < nr_cpu_ids)
> -			error = work_on_cpu(cpu, local_pci_probe, &ddi);
> +		cpu = cpumask_first_and(cpumask_of_node(node), cpu_online_mask);
> +		if (cpu != raw_smp_processor_id() && cpu < nr_cpu_ids)
> +			error = work_on_cpu_nested(cpu, local_pci_probe, &ddi);

as you wrote to me later, missing here is SINGLE_DEPTH_NESTING as the 
last param to work_on_cpu_nested
>   		else
>   			error = local_pci_probe(&ddi);
>   		put_online_cpus();

So now I used  Tejun's patch and Michael patch on top of the net.git as 
of commit 2e0cbf2cc2c9371f0aa198857d799175ffe231a6
"net: mvmdio: add select PHYLIB" from April 13 -- and I still see 
this... so we're not there yet

=====================================
[ BUG: bad unlock balance detected! ]
3.9.0-rc6+ #56 Not tainted
-------------------------------------
swapper/0/1 is trying to release lock ((&wfc.work)) at:
[<ffffffff81220167>] pci_device_probe+0x117/0x120
but there are no more locks to release!

other info that might help us debug this:
2 locks held by swapper/0/1:
  #0:  (&__lockdep_no_validate__){......}, at: [<ffffffff812da443>] 
__driver_attach+0x53/0xb0
  #1:  (&__lockdep_no_validate__){......}, at: [<ffffffff812da451>] 
__driver_attach+0x61/0xb0

stack backtrace:
Pid: 1, comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 3.9.0-rc6+ #56
Call Trace:
  [<ffffffff81220167>] ? pci_device_probe+0x117/0x120
  [<ffffffff81093529>] print_unlock_imbalance_bug+0xf9/0x100
  [<ffffffff8109616f>] lock_set_class+0x27f/0x7c0
  [<ffffffff81091d9e>] ? mark_held_locks+0x9e/0x130
  [<ffffffff81220167>] ? pci_device_probe+0x117/0x120
  [<ffffffff81066aeb>] work_on_cpu_nested+0x8b/0xc0
  [<ffffffff810633c0>] ? keventd_up+0x20/0x20
  [<ffffffff8121f420>] ? pci_pm_prepare+0x60/0x60
  [<ffffffff81220167>] pci_device_probe+0x117/0x120
  [<ffffffff812da0fa>] ? driver_sysfs_add+0x7a/0xb0
  [<ffffffff812da24f>] driver_probe_device+0x8f/0x230
  [<ffffffff812da493>] __driver_attach+0xa3/0xb0
  [<ffffffff812da3f0>] ? driver_probe_device+0x230/0x230
  [<ffffffff812da3f0>] ? driver_probe_device+0x230/0x230
  [<ffffffff812d86fc>] bus_for_each_dev+0x8c/0xb0
  [<ffffffff812da079>] driver_attach+0x19/0x20
  [<ffffffff812d91a0>] bus_add_driver+0x1f0/0x250
  [<ffffffff818bd596>] ? dmi_pcie_pme_disable_msi+0x21/0x21
  [<ffffffff812daadf>] driver_register+0x6f/0x150
  [<ffffffff818bd596>] ? dmi_pcie_pme_disable_msi+0x21/0x21
  [<ffffffff8122026f>] __pci_register_driver+0x5f/0x70
  [<ffffffff818bd5ff>] pcie_portdrv_init+0x69/0x7a
  [<ffffffff810001fd>] do_one_initcall+0x3d/0x170
  [<ffffffff81895943>] kernel_init_freeable+0x10d/0x19c
  [<ffffffff818959d2>] ? kernel_init_freeable+0x19c/0x19c
  [<ffffffff8145a040>] ? rest_init+0x160/0x160
  [<ffffffff8145a049>] kernel_init+0x9/0xf0
  [<ffffffff8146ca6c>] ret_from_fork+0x7c/0xb0
  [<ffffffff8145a040>] ? rest_init+0x160/0x160
ioapic: probe of 0000:00:13.0 failed with error -22
pci_hotplug: PCI Hot Plug PCI Core version: 0.5

--
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