Re: [PATCH] platform/x86: ISST: do not hold lock punit_misc_dev_lock when register misc

From: Liwei Song
Date: Tue Jan 11 2022 - 20:59:02 EST

Next message: Gabriel Krisman Bertazi: "[GIT PULL] unicode patches for 5.17"
Previous message: Rob Herring: "Re: [PATCH v1 13/14] dt-bindings: arm: fsl: add toradex,verdin-imx8mm et al."
In reply to: Srinivas Pandruvada: "Re: [PATCH] platform/x86: ISST: do not hold lock punit_misc_dev_lock when register misc"
Next in thread: Srinivas Pandruvada: "Re: [PATCH] platform/x86: ISST: do not hold lock punit_misc_dev_lock when register misc"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On 1/12/22 00:38, Srinivas Pandruvada wrote:
> Hi Song,
> On Tue, 2022-01-11 at 19:57 +0800, Liwei Song wrote:
>>
>> On 1/11/22 18:39, Hans de Goede wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 1/11/22 11:31, Liwei Song wrote:
>>>> exist the below call sequences may cause deadlock:
>>>>
>>>> isst_if_probe()
>>>> --> isst_if_cdev_register()
>>>> --> mutex_lock(&punit_misc_dev_lock)
>>>> --> misc_register()
>>>> --> mutex_lock(&misc_mtx)
>>>>
>>>> misc_open()
>>>> --> mutex_lock(&misc_mtx)
>>>> --> isst_if_open()
>>>> --> mutex_lock(&punit_misc_dev_lock)
>>>>
>>>> to fix this do not hold punit_misc_dev_lock when call
>>>> misc_register
>>>> since it has misc_mtx lock for sync.
>>>
>>> I agree that the punit_misc_dev_lock should not be hold during
>>> (un)registration, but this fix looks wrong with unlocking +
>>> relocking it.
>>>
>>> Normally things like this are done by setting up everything which
>>> needs
>>> to be setup before calling misc_register() and in that case the
>>> setup code does not need to lock the punit_misc_dev_lock at all
>>> since
>>> none of the misc_dev callbacks can be called before everything is
>>> setup (and the same in reverse for unregister, unregister the misc-
>>> dev
>>> before doing any teardown, then there is no need for the lock).
>>>
>>> Note the above assumes that the punit_misc_dev_lock is only used
>>> from misc-dev callbacks based on its name, I did not check this is
>>> true.
>>
>> Hi Hans,
>>
>> Thanks for your input, in my case there are two devices on my board
>> will trigger the probe routine(isst_if_probe and isst_if_mbox_probe),
>> both of them will call misc_register(), punit_misc_dev_lock is also
>> used by the probe.
> To check how to get to that scenario:
> I guess you have some application which opens isst device during system
> startup, correct?

Hi Srinivas,

I got this issue by run "intel-speed-select perf-profile get-lock-status"
after the system boot up.

Thanks,
Liwei.

>
> Thanks,
> Srinivas
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Liwei.
>>
>>
>>> Srinivas, can you take a look please ? And see if you can come up
>>> with a better fix ?
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Hans
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> [ 256.104522]
>>>> ======================================================
>>>> [ 256.113783] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency
>>>> detected
>>>> [ 256.120093] 5.16.0-rc6-yocto-standard+ #99 Not tainted
>>>> [ 256.125362] --------------------------------------------------
>>>> ----
>>>> [ 256.131673] intel-speed-sel/844 is trying to acquire lock:
>>>> [ 256.137290] ffffffffc036f0d0 (punit_misc_dev_lock){+.+.}-
>>>> {3:3}, at: isst_if_open+0x18/0x90 [isst_if_common]
>>>> [ 256.147171]
>>>> [ 256.147171] but task is already holding lock:
>>>> [ 256.153135] ffffffff8ee7cb50 (misc_mtx){+.+.}-{3:3}, at:
>>>> misc_open+0x2a/0x170
>>>> [ 256.160407]
>>>> [ 256.160407] which lock already depends on the new lock.
>>>> [ 256.160407]
>>>> [ 256.168712]
>>>> [ 256.168712] the existing dependency chain (in reverse order)
>>>> is:
>>>> [ 256.176327]
>>>> [ 256.176327] -> #1 (misc_mtx){+.+.}-{3:3}:
>>>> [ 256.181946] lock_acquire+0x1e6/0x330
>>>> [ 256.186265] __mutex_lock+0x9b/0x9b0
>>>> [ 256.190497] mutex_lock_nested+0x1b/0x20
>>>> [ 256.195075] misc_register+0x32/0x1a0
>>>> [ 256.199390] isst_if_cdev_register+0x65/0x180
>>>> [isst_if_common]
>>>> [ 256.205878] isst_if_probe+0x144/0x16e [isst_if_mmio]
>>>> [ 256.209991] hrtimer: interrupt took 10370 ns
>>>> [ 256.211582] local_pci_probe+0x47/0xa0
>>>> [ 256.220384] work_for_cpu_fn+0x17/0x30
>>>> [ 256.224790] process_one_work+0x26a/0x650
>>>> [ 256.229456] worker_thread+0x1dd/0x3b0
>>>> [ 256.233861] kthread+0x191/0x1c0
>>>> [ 256.237745] ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30
>>>> [ 256.241976]
>>>> [ 256.241976] -> #0 (punit_misc_dev_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}:
>>>> [ 256.248552] validate_chain+0xbc6/0x1750
>>>> [ 256.253131] __lock_acquire+0x88c/0xc10
>>>> [ 256.257618] lock_acquire+0x1e6/0x330
>>>> [ 256.261933] __mutex_lock+0x9b/0x9b0
>>>> [ 256.266165] mutex_lock_nested+0x1b/0x20
>>>> [ 256.270739] isst_if_open+0x18/0x90 [isst_if_common]
>>>> [ 256.276356] misc_open+0x100/0x170
>>>> [ 256.280409] chrdev_open+0xa5/0x1e0
>>>> [ 256.284550] do_dentry_open+0x23d/0x3c0
>>>> [ 256.289039] vfs_open+0x2f/0x40
>>>> [ 256.292836] path_openat+0x87a/0x940
>>>> [ 256.297064] do_filp_open+0xc5/0x140
>>>> [ 256.301295] do_sys_openat2+0x23d/0x320
>>>> [ 256.305782] do_sys_open+0x59/0x80
>>>> [ 256.309836] __x64_sys_openat+0x20/0x30
>>>> [ 256.314324] do_syscall_64+0x3f/0x90
>>>> [ 256.318552] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae
>>>> [ 256.324259]
>>>> [ 256.324259] other info that might help us debug this:
>>>> [ 256.324259]
>>>> [ 256.332394] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
>>>> [ 256.332394]
>>>> [ 256.338444] CPU0 CPU1
>>>> [ 256.343105] ---- ----
>>>> [ 256.347768] lock(misc_mtx);
>>>> [ 256.350870] lock(punit_misc_dev
>>>> _lock);
>>>> [ 256.357441] lock(misc_mtx);
>>>> [ 256.363058] lock(punit_misc_dev_lock);
>>>> [ 256.367110]
>>>> [ 256.367110] *** DEADLOCK ***
>>>> [ 256.367110]
>>>> [ 256.373162] 1 lock held by intel-speed-sel/844:
>>>> [ 256.377824] #0: ffffffff8ee7cb50 (misc_mtx){+.+.}-{3:3}, at:
>>>> misc_open+0x2a/0x170
>>>> [ 256.385531]
>>>> [ 256.385531] stack backtrace:
>>>> [ 256.390021] CPU: 12 PID: 844 Comm: intel-speed-sel Not tainted
>>>> 5.16.0-rc6-yocto-standard+ #99
>>>> [ 256.398678] Hardware name: ACCTON MOROCITY/MOROCITY, BIOS
>>>> IDVLCRB1.86B.0021.D09.2111010103 11/01/2021
>>>> [ 256.408028] Call Trace:
>>>> [ 256.410605] <TASK>
>>>> [ 256.412837] dump_stack_lvl+0x5b/0x82
>>>> [ 256.416635] dump_stack+0x10/0x12
>>>> [ 256.420085] print_circular_bug.isra.43+0x261/0x2c0
>>>> [ 256.425095] check_noncircular+0x126/0x140
>>>> [ 256.429326] ? __this_cpu_preempt_check+0x13/0x20
>>>> [ 256.434167] validate_chain+0xbc6/0x1750
>>>> [ 256.438223] ? validate_chain+0xbc6/0x1750
>>>> [ 256.442451] ? validate_chain+0x236/0x1750
>>>> [ 256.446687] __lock_acquire+0x88c/0xc10
>>>> [ 256.450658] lock_acquire+0x1e6/0x330
>>>> [ 256.454452] ? isst_if_open+0x18/0x90 [isst_if_common]
>>>> [ 256.459726] ? __mutex_lock+0x79/0x9b0
>>>> [ 256.463610] ? __mutex_lock+0x79/0x9b0
>>>> [ 256.467493] ? isst_if_open+0x18/0x90 [isst_if_common]
>>>> [ 256.472764] ? isst_if_open+0x18/0x90 [isst_if_common]
>>>> [ 256.478038] __mutex_lock+0x9b/0x9b0
>>>> [ 256.481748] ? isst_if_open+0x18/0x90 [isst_if_common]
>>>> [ 256.487021] ? __mutex_lock+0x102/0x9b0
>>>> [ 256.490993] ? __this_cpu_preempt_check+0x13/0x20
>>>> [ 256.495837] mutex_lock_nested+0x1b/0x20
>>>> [ 256.499893] ? mutex_lock_nested+0x1b/0x20
>>>> [ 256.504121] isst_if_open+0x18/0x90 [isst_if_common]
>>>> [ 256.509222] misc_open+0x100/0x170
>>>> [ 256.512759] chrdev_open+0xa5/0x1e0
>>>> [ 256.516386] ? cdev_put.part.1+0x20/0x20
>>>> [ 256.520441] do_dentry_open+0x23d/0x3c0
>>>> [ 256.524414] vfs_open+0x2f/0x40
>>>> [ 256.527689] path_openat+0x87a/0x940
>>>> [ 256.531399] do_filp_open+0xc5/0x140
>>>> [ 256.535112] ? trace_preempt_on+0x28/0xd0
>>>> [ 256.539255] ? alloc_fd+0x152/0x230
>>>> [ 256.542880] ? preempt_count_sub+0x9b/0x100
>>>> [ 256.547200] ? _raw_spin_unlock+0x2c/0x50
>>>> [ 256.551348] do_sys_openat2+0x23d/0x320
>>>> [ 256.555320] ? do_sys_openat2+0x23d/0x320
>>>> [ 256.559467] do_sys_open+0x59/0x80
>>>> [ 256.563003] __x64_sys_openat+0x20/0x30
>>>> [ 256.566972] do_syscall_64+0x3f/0x90
>>>> [ 256.570680] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae
>>>> [ 256.575866] RIP: 0033:0x7f9be4b97c27
>>>> [ 256.579576] Code: 25 00 00 41 00 3d 00 00 41 00 74 37 64 8b 04
>>>> 25 18 00 00 00 85 c0 75 5b 44 89 e2 48 89 ee bf 9c ff ff ff b8 01
>>>> 01 00 00 0f 05 <48> 3d 00 f0 ff ff 0f 87 85 00 00 00 48 83 c4 68
>>>> 5d 41 5c c3 0f 1f
>>>> [ 256.598474] RSP: 002b:00007ffd8fc01b70 EFLAGS: 00000246
>>>> ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000101
>>>> [ 256.606177] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00005572f20332b0 RCX:
>>>> 00007f9be4b97c27
>>>> [ 256.613443] RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: 00005572f202936a RDI:
>>>> 00000000ffffff9c
>>>> [ 256.620709] RBP: 00005572f202936a R08: 0000000000000008 R09:
>>>> 0000000000000001
>>>> [ 256.627974] R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000246 R12:
>>>> 0000000000000000
>>>> [ 256.635241] R13: 00005572f20332b0 R14: 0000000000000001 R15:
>>>> 0000000000000000
>>>> [ 256.642513] </TASK>
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Liwei Song <liwei.song@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/platform/x86/intel/speed_select_if/isst_if_common.c | 6
>>>> +++++-
>>>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git
>>>> a/drivers/platform/x86/intel/speed_select_if/isst_if_common.c
>>>> b/drivers/platform/x86/intel/speed_select_if/isst_if_common.c
>>>> index c9a85eb2e860..bcbc0d508ec4 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/intel/speed_select_if/isst_if_common.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/intel/speed_select_if/isst_if_common.c
>>>> @@ -693,10 +693,12 @@ int isst_if_cdev_register(int device_type,
>>>> struct isst_if_cmd_cb *cb)
>>>> if (!misc_usage_count) {
>>>> int ret;
>>>>
>>>> + mutex_unlock(&punit_misc_dev_lock);
>>>> misc_device_ret = misc_register(&isst_if_char_driver);
>>>> if (misc_device_ret)
>>>> - goto unlock_exit;
>>>> + return misc_device_ret;
>>>>
>>>> + mutex_lock(&punit_misc_dev_lock);
>>>> ret = isst_if_cpu_info_init();
>>>> if (ret) {
>>>> misc_deregister(&isst_if_char_driver);
>>>> @@ -731,7 +733,9 @@ void isst_if_cdev_unregister(int device_type)
>>>> if (device_type == ISST_IF_DEV_MBOX)
>>>> isst_delete_hash();
>>>> if (!misc_usage_count && !misc_device_ret) {
>>>> + mutex_unlock(&punit_misc_dev_lock);
>>>> misc_deregister(&isst_if_char_driver);
>>>> + mutex_lock(&punit_misc_dev_lock);
>>>> isst_if_cpu_info_exit();
>>>> }
>>>> mutex_unlock(&punit_misc_dev_lock);
>>>>
>

Next message: Gabriel Krisman Bertazi: "[GIT PULL] unicode patches for 5.17"
Previous message: Rob Herring: "Re: [PATCH v1 13/14] dt-bindings: arm: fsl: add toradex,verdin-imx8mm et al."
In reply to: Srinivas Pandruvada: "Re: [PATCH] platform/x86: ISST: do not hold lock punit_misc_dev_lock when register misc"
Next in thread: Srinivas Pandruvada: "Re: [PATCH] platform/x86: ISST: do not hold lock punit_misc_dev_lock when register misc"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]