On 14-09-18, 14:53, 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.
Applied, thanks
--
~Vinod
