On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 11:49:45AM +0000, Gonglei (Arei) wrote:
> Doing ipsec produces a spinlock recursion warning.
> This is due to crypto_finalize_request() being called in the upper half.
> Move virtual data queue processing of virtio-crypto driver to tasklet.
>
> Fixes: dbaf0624ffa57 ("crypto: add virtio-crypto driver")
> Reported-by: Halil Pasic <pasic@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: wangyangxin <wangyangxin1@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Gonglei <arei.gonglei@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/crypto/virtio/virtio_crypto_common.h | 2 ++
> drivers/crypto/virtio/virtio_crypto_core.c | 23 +++++++++++++----------
> 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/crypto/virtio/virtio_crypto_common.h b/drivers/crypto/virtio/virtio_crypto_common.h
> index 59a4c02..5c17c6e 100644
> --- a/drivers/crypto/virtio/virtio_crypto_common.h
> +++ b/drivers/crypto/virtio/virtio_crypto_common.h
> @@ -10,6 +10,7 @@
> #include <linux/virtio.h>
> #include <linux/crypto.h>
> #include <linux/spinlock.h>
> +#include <linux/interrupt.h>
> #include <crypto/aead.h>
> #include <crypto/aes.h>
> #include <crypto/engine.h>
> @@ -28,6 +29,7 @@ struct data_queue {
> char name[32];
>
> struct crypto_engine *engine;
> + struct tasklet_struct done_task;
> };
>
> struct virtio_crypto {
> diff --git a/drivers/crypto/virtio/virtio_crypto_core.c b/drivers/crypto/virtio/virtio_crypto_core.c
> index 1198bd3..e747f4f 100644
> --- a/drivers/crypto/virtio/virtio_crypto_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/crypto/virtio/virtio_crypto_core.c
> @@ -72,27 +72,28 @@ int virtio_crypto_ctrl_vq_request(struct virtio_crypto *vcrypto, struct scatterl
> return 0;
> }
>
> -static void virtcrypto_dataq_callback(struct virtqueue *vq)
> +static void virtcrypto_done_task(unsigned long data)
> {
> - struct virtio_crypto *vcrypto = vq->vdev->priv;
> + struct data_queue *data_vq = (struct data_queue *)data;
> + struct virtqueue *vq = data_vq->vq;
> struct virtio_crypto_request *vc_req;
> - unsigned long flags;
> unsigned int len;
> - unsigned int qid = vq->index;
>
> - spin_lock_irqsave(&vcrypto->data_vq[qid].lock, flags);
> do {
> virtqueue_disable_cb(vq);
> while ((vc_req = virtqueue_get_buf(vq, &len)) != NULL) {
> - spin_unlock_irqrestore(
> - &vcrypto->data_vq[qid].lock, flags);
> if (vc_req->alg_cb)
> vc_req->alg_cb(vc_req, len);
> - spin_lock_irqsave(
> - &vcrypto->data_vq[qid].lock, flags);
> }
> } while (!virtqueue_enable_cb(vq));
> - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&vcrypto->data_vq[qid].lock, flags);
> +}
> +
> +static void virtcrypto_dataq_callback(struct virtqueue *vq)
> +{
> + struct virtio_crypto *vcrypto = vq->vdev->priv;
> + struct data_queue *dq = &vcrypto->data_vq[vq->index];
> +
> + tasklet_schedule(&dq->done_task);
> }
>
Don't we then need to wait for tasklet to complete on
device remove?
> static int virtcrypto_find_vqs(struct virtio_crypto *vi)
> @@ -150,6 +151,8 @@ static int virtcrypto_find_vqs(struct virtio_crypto *vi)
> ret = -ENOMEM;
> goto err_engine;
> }
> + tasklet_init(&vi->data_vq[i].done_task, virtcrypto_done_task,
> + (unsigned long)&vi->data_vq[i]);
> }
>
> kfree(names);
> --
> 1.8.3.1
>
>
