Re: [PATCH net-next v15 03/14] netdev: support binding dma-buf to netdevice

[Mina Almasry]

On Thu, Jul 4, 2024 at 10:57 AM Taehee Yoo <ap420073@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> I found several locking warnings while testing.
>

Thanks for Testing Taehee! And sorry for the late reply. I was off for
a couple of days. With some minor tweaks to my test setup I was able
to reproduce and fix all 3 warnings.

> [ 1135.125874] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 1644 at
> drivers/dma-buf/dma-buf.c:1123 dma_buf_map_attachment+0x164/0x2f0
...
> [ 1136.178258] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 1644 at
> drivers/dma-buf/dma-buf.c:1226 dma_buf_unmap_attachment+0x267/0x320

Both of these are warnings that dma->resv is not locked when calling
dma_buf_[un]map_attachment(). As far as I can tell so far, this can be
resolved by using the unlocked versions:
dma_buf_[un]map_attachment_unlocked() which is correct here for this
static importer.

...

> [ 1135.709313] WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 1644 at
> net/core/netdev_rx_queue.c:18 netdev_rx_queue_restart+0x3f4/0x5a0

This is due to rtnl_lock() actually not being acquired in the unbind
path, when the netlink socket is closed. Sorry about that. This is
fixed by obtaining rtnl_lock() in the unbind path.

With the fixes below all the warnings disappear. I'm planning to
squash them to the next version. Let me know if those don't work for
you. Thanks!

diff --git a/net/core/devmem.c b/net/core/devmem.c
index e52bca1a55c7c..a6ef1485b80f2 100644
--- a/net/core/devmem.c
+++ b/net/core/devmem.c
@@ -46,8 +46,8 @@ void __net_devmem_dmabuf_binding_free(struct
net_devmem_dmabuf_binding *binding)
                  size, avail))
                gen_pool_destroy(binding->chunk_pool);

-       dma_buf_unmap_attachment(binding->attachment, binding->sgt,
-                                DMA_FROM_DEVICE);
+       dma_buf_unmap_attachment_unlocked(binding->attachment, binding->sgt,
+                                         DMA_FROM_DEVICE);
        dma_buf_detach(binding->dmabuf, binding->attachment);
        dma_buf_put(binding->dmabuf);
        xa_destroy(&binding->bound_rxqs);
@@ -157,8 +157,8 @@ struct net_devmem_dmabuf_binding
*net_devmem_bind_dmabuf(struct net_device *dev,
                goto err_free_id;
        }

-       binding->sgt =
-               dma_buf_map_attachment(binding->attachment, DMA_FROM_DEVICE);
+       binding->sgt = dma_buf_map_attachment_unlocked(binding->attachment,
+                                                      DMA_FROM_DEVICE);
        if (IS_ERR(binding->sgt)) {
                err = PTR_ERR(binding->sgt);
                goto err_detach;
@@ -225,8 +225,8 @@ struct net_devmem_dmabuf_binding
*net_devmem_bind_dmabuf(struct net_device *dev,
                                net_devmem_dmabuf_free_chunk_owner, NULL);
        gen_pool_destroy(binding->chunk_pool);
 err_unmap:
-       dma_buf_unmap_attachment(binding->attachment, binding->sgt,
-                                DMA_FROM_DEVICE);
+       dma_buf_unmap_attachment_unlocked(binding->attachment, binding->sgt,
+                                         DMA_FROM_DEVICE);
 err_detach:
        dma_buf_detach(dmabuf, binding->attachment);
 err_free_id:
diff --git a/net/core/netdev-genl.c b/net/core/netdev-genl.c
index 4b16b3ad2ec5b..33bb20c143997 100644
--- a/net/core/netdev-genl.c
+++ b/net/core/netdev-genl.c
@@ -861,6 +861,9 @@ void netdev_nl_sock_priv_destroy(struct list_head *priv)
        struct net_devmem_dmabuf_binding *binding;
        struct net_devmem_dmabuf_binding *temp;

-       list_for_each_entry_safe(binding, temp, priv, list)
+       list_for_each_entry_safe(binding, temp, priv, list) {
+               rtnl_lock();
                net_devmem_unbind_dmabuf(binding);
+               rtnl_unlock();
+       }
 }



--
Thanks,
Mina