Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E257BC636CC for ; Sat, 11 Feb 2023 11:35:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230094AbjBKLe7 (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Feb 2023 06:34:59 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:49738 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230087AbjBKLex (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Feb 2023 06:34:53 -0500 Received: from ams.source.kernel.org (ams.source.kernel.org [IPv6:2604:1380:4601:e00::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 650CA1F5E8; Sat, 11 Feb 2023 03:34:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ams.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 05F2AB8015B; Sat, 11 Feb 2023 11:34:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B7EFDC433D2; Sat, 11 Feb 2023 11:34:48 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1676115288; bh=dhtusJGynXGgskXM92CDiaTl631kCSGdwtjk5C98K3A=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=Yef82oIpRDD2NsasPYaOgvr3WR+0uo7DOAZBQ6JL8CQST5/MoDeDCY45qMGkcgjU/ N/UarZFbF6yJW+SRxbMQXcvrIm6/qqnimfHFcHRV0wTVgZUo4f1re3rj5ggDtqYghu JwBch+2MBCjxTCc6/LWatXrlKVv2zoSQqO/kRk8NvGWYG4/kMhJntF2HQF3Y7SNbeF k4p1XEKZRJWU2Vf4+H0wmdR4hebzahfL0RLGj2W5WmoOFycUJCprQg2B5UYgO+wlIa 6uxslTKorD9PpXDHi9fUkCCW/0hZ+lWUo4yPZzAqaV6DwA6L95wvCf9VhG2x5b8NDa V+hA5B7/7bktg== Received: from johan by xi.lan with local (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1pQoAG-0004iB-MA; Sat, 11 Feb 2023 12:35:33 +0100 Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2023 12:35:32 +0100 From: Johan Hovold To: Marc Zyngier Cc: Johan Hovold , Thomas Gleixner , x86@kernel.org, platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Hsin-Yi Wang , Mark-PK Tsai Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 19/19] irqdomain: Switch to per-domain locking Message-ID: References: <20230209132323.4599-1-johan+linaro@kernel.org> <20230209132323.4599-20-johan+linaro@kernel.org> <86cz6izv48.wl-maz@kernel.org> <86bkm1zr59.wl-maz@kernel.org> <868rh5zhj6.wl-maz@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <868rh5zhj6.wl-maz@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 03:06:37PM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote: > On Fri, 10 Feb 2023 12:57:40 +0000, > Johan Hovold wrote: > > > > On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 11:38:58AM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote: > > > On Fri, 10 Feb 2023 09:56:03 +0000, > > > Johan Hovold wrote: > > > > > > @@ -1132,6 +1147,7 @@ struct irq_domain *irq_domain_create_hierarchy(struct irq_domain *parent, > > > > > > else > > > > > > domain = irq_domain_create_tree(fwnode, ops, host_data); > > > > > > if (domain) { > > > > > > + domain->root = parent->root; > > > > > > domain->parent = parent; > > > > > > domain->flags |= flags; > > > > > > > > > > So we still have a bug here, as we have published a domain that we > > > > > keep updating. A parallel probing could find it in the interval and do > > > > > something completely wrong. > > > > > > > > Indeed we do, even if device links should make this harder to hit these > > > > days. > > > > > > > > > Splitting the work would help, as per the following patch. > > > > > > > > Looks good to me. Do you want to submit that as a patch that I'll rebase > > > > on or should I submit it as part of a v6? > > > > > > Just take it directly. > > > > Ok, thanks. I've added a commit message and turned it into a patch to include in v6 now: commit 3af395aa894c7df94ef2337e572e5e1710b4bbda (HEAD -> work) Author: Marc Zyngier Date: Thu Feb 9 16:00:55 2023 +0000 irqdomain: Fix domain registration race Hierarchical domains created using irq_domain_create_hierarchy() are currently added to the domain list before having been fully initialised. This specifically means that a racing allocation request might fail to allocate irq data for the inner domains of a hierarchy in case the parent domain pointer has not yet been set up. Note that this is not really any issue for irqchip drivers that are registered early via IRQCHIP_DECLARE() or IRQCHIP_ACPI_DECLARE(), but could potentially cause trouble with drivers that are registered later (e.g. when using IRQCHIP_PLATFORM_DRIVER_BEGIN(), gpiochip drivers, etc.). Fixes: afb7da83b9f4 ("irqdomain: Introduce helper function irq_domain_add_hierarchy()") Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # 3.19 ... [ johan: add a commit message ] Signed-off-by: Johan Hovold Could you just give your SoB for the diff here so I can credit you as author? > > I guess this turns the "Use irq_domain_create_hierarchy()" patches into > > fixes that should be backported as well. > > Maybe. Backports are not my immediate concern. Turns out all of those drivers are registered early via IRQCHIP_DECLARE() or IRQCHIP_ACPI_DECLARE() so there shouldn't really be any risk of hitting this race for those. > > But note that your proposed diff may not be sufficient to prevent > > lookups from racing with domain registration generally. Many drivers > > still update the bus token after the domain has been added (and > > apparently some still set flags also after creating hierarchies I just > > noticed, e.g. amd_iommu_create_irq_domain). > > The bus token should only rarely be a problem, as it is often set on > an intermediate level which isn't directly looked-up by anything else. > And if it did happen, it would probably result in a the domain not > being found. > > Flags, on the other hand, are more problematic. But I consider this a > driver bug which should be fixed independently. I agree. > > It seems we'd need to expose a separate allocation and registration > > interface, or at least pass in the bus token to a new combined > > interface. > > Potentially, yes. But this could come later down the line. I'm more > concerned in getting this series into -next, as the merge window is > fast approaching. I'll post a v6 first thing Monday if you can give me that SoB before then. Johan