On 09/14/2018 11:53 AM, Waiman Long wrote:
> The following lockdep splat was observed:
>
> [ 1222.241750] ======================================================
> [ 1222.271301] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
> [ 1222.301060] 4.16.0-10.el8+5.x86_64+debug #1 Not tainted
> [ 1222.326659] ------------------------------------------------------
> [ 1222.356565] systemd-shutdow/1 is trying to acquire lock:
> [ 1222.382660] ((&ioat_chan->timer)){+.-.}, at: [<00000000f71e1a28>]
> del_timer_sync+0x5/0xf0
> [ 1222.422928]
> [ 1222.422928] but task is already holding lock:
> [ 1222.451743] (&(&ioat_chan->prep_lock)->rlock){+.-.}, at:
> [<000000008ea98b12>] ioat_shutdown+0x86/0x100 [ioatdma]
> :
> [ 1223.524987] Chain exists of:
> [ 1223.524987] (&ioat_chan->timer) --> &(&ioat_chan->cleanup_lock)->rlock
> --> &(&ioat_chan->prep_lock)->rlock
> [ 1223.524987]
> [ 1223.594082] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
> [ 1223.594082]
> [ 1223.622630] CPU0 CPU1
> [ 1223.645080] ---- ----
> [ 1223.667404] lock(&(&ioat_chan->prep_lock)->rlock);
> [ 1223.691535]
> lock(&(&ioat_chan->cleanup_lock)->rlock);
> [ 1223.728657]
> lock(&(&ioat_chan->prep_lock)->rlock);
> [ 1223.765122] lock((&ioat_chan->timer));
> [ 1223.784095]
> [ 1223.784095] *** DEADLOCK ***
> [ 1223.784095]
> [ 1223.813492] 4 locks held by systemd-shutdow/1:
> [ 1223.834677] #0: (reboot_mutex){+.+.}, at: [<0000000056d33456>]
> SYSC_reboot+0x10f/0x300
> [ 1223.873310] #1: (&dev->mutex){....}, at: [<00000000258dfdd7>]
> device_shutdown+0x1c8/0x660
> [ 1223.913604] #2: (&dev->mutex){....}, at: [<0000000068331147>]
> device_shutdown+0x1d6/0x660
> [ 1223.954000] #3: (&(&ioat_chan->prep_lock)->rlock){+.-.}, at:
> [<000000008ea98b12>] ioat_shutdown+0x86/0x100 [ioatdma]
>
> In the ioat_shutdown() function:
>
> spin_lock_bh(&ioat_chan->prep_lock);
> set_bit(IOAT_CHAN_DOWN, &ioat_chan->state);
> del_timer_sync(&ioat_chan->timer);
> spin_unlock_bh(&ioat_chan->prep_lock);
>
> According to the synchronization rule for the del_timer_sync() function,
> the caller must not hold locks which would prevent completion of the
> timer's handler.
>
> The timer structure has its own lock that manages its synchronization.
> Setting the IOAT_CHAN_DOWN bit should prevent other CPUs from
> trying to use that device anyway, there is probably no need to call
> del_timer_sync() while holding the prep_lock. So the del_timer_sync()
> call is now moved outside of the prep_lock critical section to prevent
> the circular lock dependency.
>
> Signed-off-by: Waiman Long <long...@redhat.com>
Thanks!
Reviewed-by: Dave Jiang <dave.ji...@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/dma/ioat/init.c | 9 ++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/dma/ioat/init.c b/drivers/dma/ioat/init.c
> index 4fa4c06..21a5708 100644
> --- a/drivers/dma/ioat/init.c
> +++ b/drivers/dma/ioat/init.c
> @@ -1205,8 +1205,15 @@ static void ioat_shutdown(struct pci_dev *pdev)
>
> spin_lock_bh(&ioat_chan->prep_lock);
> set_bit(IOAT_CHAN_DOWN, &ioat_chan->state);
> - del_timer_sync(&ioat_chan->timer);
> spin_unlock_bh(&ioat_chan->prep_lock);
> + /*
> + * Synchronization rule for del_timer_sync():
> + * - The caller must not hold locks which would prevent
> + * completion of the timer's handler.
> + * So prep_lock cannot be held before calling it.
> + */
> + del_timer_sync(&ioat_chan->timer);
> +
> /* this should quiesce then reset */
> ioat_reset_hw(ioat_chan);
> }
>
