In __driver_attach function, There are also potential AA deadlock
problem, like the commit b232b02bf3c2 ("driver core: fix deadlock
in __device_attach").
Fixes: ef0ff68351be ("driver core: Probe devices asynchronously instead of the driver")
Signed-off-by: Zhang Wensheng <[email protected]>
---
drivers/base/dd.c | 5 ++++-
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/base/dd.c b/drivers/base/dd.c
index 11b0fb6414d3..b766968a873c 100644
--- a/drivers/base/dd.c
+++ b/drivers/base/dd.c
@@ -1115,6 +1115,7 @@ static void __driver_attach_async_helper(void *_dev, async_cookie_t cookie)
static int __driver_attach(struct device *dev, void *data)
{
struct device_driver *drv = data;
+ bool async = false;
int ret;
/*
@@ -1153,9 +1154,11 @@ static int __driver_attach(struct device *dev, void *data)
if (!dev->driver && !dev->p->async_driver) {
get_device(dev);
dev->p->async_driver = drv;
- async_schedule_dev(__driver_attach_async_helper, dev);
+ async = true;
}
device_unlock(dev);
+ if (async)
+ async_schedule_dev(__driver_attach_async_helper, dev);
return 0;
}
--
2.31.1
On Wed, Jun 08, 2022 at 05:43:55PM +0800, Zhang Wensheng wrote:
> In __driver_attach function, There are also potential AA deadlock
> problem, like the commit b232b02bf3c2 ("driver core: fix deadlock
> in __device_attach").
Potential, but real?
And the codepaths for drivers being added is much different than
devices, please provide the full information like you did in the other
commit.
Also, have you triggered this problem successfully and proven that this
change fixes the issue?
thanks,
greg k-h
friendly ping...
在 2022/6/8 17:43, Zhang Wensheng 写道:
> In __driver_attach function, There are also potential AA deadlock
> problem, like the commit b232b02bf3c2 ("driver core: fix deadlock
> in __device_attach").
>
> Fixes: ef0ff68351be ("driver core: Probe devices asynchronously instead of the driver")
> Signed-off-by: Zhang Wensheng <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/base/dd.c | 5 ++++-
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/base/dd.c b/drivers/base/dd.c
> index 11b0fb6414d3..b766968a873c 100644
> --- a/drivers/base/dd.c
> +++ b/drivers/base/dd.c
> @@ -1115,6 +1115,7 @@ static void __driver_attach_async_helper(void *_dev, async_cookie_t cookie)
> static int __driver_attach(struct device *dev, void *data)
> {
> struct device_driver *drv = data;
> + bool async = false;
> int ret;
>
> /*
> @@ -1153,9 +1154,11 @@ static int __driver_attach(struct device *dev, void *data)
> if (!dev->driver && !dev->p->async_driver) {
> get_device(dev);
> dev->p->async_driver = drv;
> - async_schedule_dev(__driver_attach_async_helper, dev);
> + async = true;
> }
> device_unlock(dev);
> + if (async)
> + async_schedule_dev(__driver_attach_async_helper, dev);
> return 0;
> }
>
sorry that I didn't see your reply.
it is real not potential, I have triggered this problem successfully and
proven that this change can fix it.
stack like commit b232b02bf3c2 ("driver core: fix deadlock in
__device_attach").
list below:
In __driver_attach function, The lock holding logic is as follows:
...
__driver_attach
if (driver_allows_async_probing(drv))
device_lock(dev) // get lock dev
async_schedule_dev(__driver_attach_async_helper, dev); // func
async_schedule_node
async_schedule_node_domain(func)
entry = kzalloc(sizeof(struct async_entry), GFP_ATOMIC);
/* when fail or work limit, sync to execute func, but
__driver_attach_async_helper will get lock dev as
will, which will lead to A-A deadlock. */
if (!entry || atomic_read(&entry_count) > MAX_WORK) {
func;
else
queue_work_node(node, system_unbound_wq, &entry->work)
device_unlock(dev)
As above show, when it is allowed to do async probes, because of
out of memory or work limit, async work is not be allowed, to do
sync execute instead. it will lead to A-A deadlock because of
__driver_attach_async_helper getting lock dev.
Because it's logic is same as commit b232b02bf3c2 ("driver core:
fix deadlock
in __device_attach"), I simplify the description.
Reproduce:
and it can be reproduce by make the condition
(if (!entry || atomic_read(&entry_count) > MAX_WORK)) untenable, like below:
[ 370.785650] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs"
disables this message.
[ 370.787154] task:swapper/0 state:D stack: 0 pid: 1
ppid: 0 flags:0x00004000
[ 370.788865] Call Trace:
[ 370.789374] <TASK>
[ 370.789841] __schedule+0x482/0x1050
[ 370.790613] schedule+0x92/0x1a0
[ 370.791290] schedule_preempt_disabled+0x2c/0x50
[ 370.792256] __mutex_lock.isra.0+0x757/0xec0
[ 370.793158] __mutex_lock_slowpath+0x1f/0x30
[ 370.794079] mutex_lock+0x50/0x60
[ 370.794795] __device_driver_lock+0x2f/0x70
[ 370.795677] ? driver_probe_device+0xd0/0xd0
[ 370.796576] __driver_attach_async_helper+0x1d/0xd0
[ 370.797318] ? driver_probe_device+0xd0/0xd0
[ 370.797957] async_schedule_node_domain+0xa5/0xc0
[ 370.798652] async_schedule_node+0x19/0x30
[ 370.799243] __driver_attach+0x246/0x290
[ 370.799828] ? driver_allows_async_probing+0xa0/0xa0
[ 370.800548] bus_for_each_dev+0x9d/0x130
[ 370.801132] driver_attach+0x22/0x30
[ 370.801666] bus_add_driver+0x290/0x340
[ 370.802246] driver_register+0x88/0x140
[ 370.802817] ? virtio_scsi_init+0x116/0x116
[ 370.803425] scsi_register_driver+0x1a/0x30
[ 370.804057] init_sd+0x184/0x226
[ 370.804533] do_one_initcall+0x71/0x3a0
[ 370.805107] kernel_init_freeable+0x39a/0x43a
[ 370.805759] ? rest_init+0x150/0x150
[ 370.806283] kernel_init+0x26/0x230
[ 370.806799] ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30
And my change can fix it.
thanks.
Wensheng.
在 2022/6/10 21:49, Greg KH 写道:
> On Wed, Jun 08, 2022 at 05:43:55PM +0800, Zhang Wensheng wrote:
>> In __driver_attach function, There are also potential AA deadlock
>> problem, like the commit b232b02bf3c2 ("driver core: fix deadlock
>> in __device_attach").
> Potential, but real?
>
> And the codepaths for drivers being added is much different than
> devices, please provide the full information like you did in the other
> commit.
>
> Also, have you triggered this problem successfully and proven that this
> change fixes the issue?
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
> .
A: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_post
Q: Were do I find info about this thing called top-posting?
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
A: No.
Q: Should I include quotations after my reply?
http://daringfireball.net/2007/07/on_top
On Thu, Jun 16, 2022 at 04:00:58PM +0800, zhangwensheng (E) wrote:
> sorry that I didn't see your reply.
> it is real not potential, I have triggered this problem successfully and
> proven that this change can fix it.
>
> stack like commit b232b02bf3c2 ("driver core: fix deadlock in
> __device_attach").
> list below:
> ??? In __driver_attach function, The lock holding logic is as follows:
> ??? ...
> ??? __driver_attach
> ??? if (driver_allows_async_probing(drv))
> ????? device_lock(dev)????? // get lock dev
> ??????? async_schedule_dev(__driver_attach_async_helper, dev); // func
> ????????? async_schedule_node
> ??????????? async_schedule_node_domain(func)
> ????????????? entry = kzalloc(sizeof(struct async_entry), GFP_ATOMIC);
> ????????????? /* when fail or work limit, sync to execute func, but
> ???????????????? __driver_attach_async_helper will get lock dev as
> ???????????????? will, which will lead to A-A deadlock.? */
> ????????????? if (!entry || atomic_read(&entry_count) > MAX_WORK) {
> ??????????????? func;
> ????????????? else
> ??????????????? queue_work_node(node, system_unbound_wq, &entry->work)
> ????? device_unlock(dev)
>
> ??? As above show, when it is allowed to do async probes, because of
> ??? out of memory or work limit, async work is not be allowed, to do
> ??? sync execute instead. it will lead to A-A deadlock because of
> ??? __driver_attach_async_helper getting lock dev.
>
> ??? Because it's logic is same as commit b232b02bf3c2 ("driver core: fix
> deadlock
> ??? in __device_attach"),? I simplify the description.
>
>
> Reproduce:
> and it can be reproduce by make the condition
> (if (!entry || atomic_read(&entry_count) > MAX_WORK)) untenable, like below:
>
> [? 370.785650] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables
> this message.
> [? 370.787154] task:swapper/0?????? state:D stack:??? 0 pid:??? 1 ppid:????
> 0 flags:0x00004000
> [? 370.788865] Call Trace:
> [? 370.789374]? <TASK>
> [? 370.789841]? __schedule+0x482/0x1050
> [? 370.790613]? schedule+0x92/0x1a0
> [? 370.791290]? schedule_preempt_disabled+0x2c/0x50
> [? 370.792256]? __mutex_lock.isra.0+0x757/0xec0
> [? 370.793158]? __mutex_lock_slowpath+0x1f/0x30
> [? 370.794079]? mutex_lock+0x50/0x60
> [? 370.794795]? __device_driver_lock+0x2f/0x70
> [? 370.795677]? ? driver_probe_device+0xd0/0xd0
> [? 370.796576]? __driver_attach_async_helper+0x1d/0xd0
> [? 370.797318]? ? driver_probe_device+0xd0/0xd0
> [? 370.797957]? async_schedule_node_domain+0xa5/0xc0
> [? 370.798652]? async_schedule_node+0x19/0x30
> [? 370.799243]? __driver_attach+0x246/0x290
> [? 370.799828]? ? driver_allows_async_probing+0xa0/0xa0
> [? 370.800548]? bus_for_each_dev+0x9d/0x130
> [? 370.801132]? driver_attach+0x22/0x30
> [? 370.801666]? bus_add_driver+0x290/0x340
> [? 370.802246]? driver_register+0x88/0x140
> [? 370.802817]? ? virtio_scsi_init+0x116/0x116
> [? 370.803425]? scsi_register_driver+0x1a/0x30
> [? 370.804057]? init_sd+0x184/0x226
> [? 370.804533]? do_one_initcall+0x71/0x3a0
> [? 370.805107]? kernel_init_freeable+0x39a/0x43a
> [? 370.805759]? ? rest_init+0x150/0x150
> [? 370.806283]? kernel_init+0x26/0x230
> [? 370.806799]? ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30
>
> And my change can fix it.
Ok, please put that type of information in the changelog text.
thanks,
greg k-h