Quoting Sultan Alsawaf (2020-04-07 07:26:22)
> From: Sultan Alsawaf <sultan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> The following deadlock exists in i915_active_wait() due to a double lock
> on ref->mutex (call chain listed in order from top to bottom):
> i915_active_wait();
> mutex_lock_interruptible(&ref->mutex); <-- ref->mutex first acquired
> i915_active_request_retire();
> node_retire();
> active_retire();
> mutex_lock_nested(&ref->mutex, SINGLE_DEPTH_NESTING); <-- DEADLOCK
>
> Fix the deadlock by skipping the second ref->mutex lock when
> active_retire() is called through i915_active_request_retire().
>
> Fixes: 12c255b5dad1 ("drm/i915: Provide an i915_active.acquire callback")
> Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> # 5.4.x
> Signed-off-by: Sultan Alsawaf <sultan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Incorrect.
You missed that it cannot retire from inside the wait due to the active
reference held on the i915_active for the wait.
The only point it can enter retire from inside i915_active_wait() is via
the terminal __active_retire() which releases the mutex in doing so.
-Chris
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
