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 > >