Re: Re: [PATCH v3] iwcm: don't hold the irq disabled lock on iw_rem_ref

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 4:38 AM Bernard Metzler <BMT@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> -----"Krishnamraju Eraparaju" <krishna2@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: -----
>
> >To: "Sagi Grimberg" <sagi@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "Steve Wise"
> ><larrystevenwise@xxxxxxxxx>, "Bernard Metzler" <BMT@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >From: "Krishnamraju Eraparaju" <krishna2@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >Date: 09/10/2019 09:22PM
> >Cc: "linux-rdma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-rdma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Jason
> >Gunthorpe" <jgg@xxxxxxxx>
> >Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [PATCH v3] iwcm: don't hold the irq disabled
> >lock on iw_rem_ref
> >
> >Please review the below patch, I will resubmit this in patch-series
> >after review.
> >- As kput_ref handler(siw_free_qp) uses vfree, iwcm can't call
> >  iw_rem_ref() with spinlocks held. Doing so can cause vfree() to
> >sleep
> >  with irq disabled.
> >  Two possible solutions:
> >  1)With spinlock acquired, take a copy of "cm_id_priv->qp" and
> >update
> >    it to NULL. And after releasing lock use the copied qp pointer
> >for
> >    rem_ref().
> >  2)Replacing issue causing vmalloc()/vfree to kmalloc()/kfree in SIW
> >    driver, may not be a ideal solution.
> >
> >  Solution 2 may not be ideal as allocating huge contigous memory for
> >   SQ & RQ doesn't look appropriate.
> >
> >- The structure "siw_base_qp" is getting freed in siw_destroy_qp(),
> >but
> >  if cm_close_handler() holds the last reference, then siw_free_qp(),
> >  via cm_close_handler(), tries to get already freed "siw_base_qp"
> >from
> >  "ib_qp".
> >   Hence, "siw_base_qp" should be freed at the end of siw_free_qp().
> >
>
> Regarding the siw driver, I am fine with that proposed
> change. Delaying freeing the base_qp is OK. In fact,
> I'd expect the drivers soon are passing that responsibility
> to the rdma core anyway -- like for CQ/SRQ/PD/CTX objects,
> which are already allocated and freed up there.
>
> The iwcm changes look OK to me as well.
>

Hey Krishna,  Since the iwcm struct/state is still correctly being
manipulated under the lock, then I think it this patch correct.  Test
the heck out of it. :)

Steve.



[Index of Archives]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Photo]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]

  Powered by Linux