Search Linux Wireless

Re: [PATCH 4/5] ath10k: detect conf_mutex held ath10k_drain_tx() calls

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

 



On 2/11/21 4:20 AM, Kalle Valo wrote:
Shuah Khan <skhan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

On 2/10/21 1:25 AM, Kalle Valo wrote:
Shuah Khan <skhan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

ath10k_drain_tx() must not be called with conf_mutex held as workers can
use that also. Add check to detect conf_mutex held calls.

Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

The commit log does not answer to "Why?". How did you find this? What
actual problem are you trying to solve?


I came across the comment block above the ath10k_drain_tx() as I was
reviewing at conf_mutex holds while I was debugging the conf_mutex
lock assert in ath10k_debug_fw_stats_request().

My reasoning is that having this will help detect incorrect usages
of ath10k_drain_tx() while holding conf_mutex which could lead to
locking problems when async worker routines try to call this routine.

Ok, makes sense. I prefer having this background info in the commit log,
for example "found by code review" or something like that. Or just copy
what you wrote above :)


Thanks. I will do that.

--- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/mac.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/mac.c
@@ -4566,6 +4566,7 @@ static void
ath10k_mac_op_wake_tx_queue(struct ieee80211_hw *hw,
   /* Must not be called with conf_mutex held as workers can use that also. */
   void ath10k_drain_tx(struct ath10k *ar)
   {
+	WARN_ON(lockdep_is_held(&ar->conf_mutex));

Empty line after WARN_ON().


Will do.

Shouldn't this check debug_locks similarly lockdep_assert_held() does?

#define lockdep_assert_held(l)	do {				\
		WARN_ON(debug_locks && !lockdep_is_held(l));	\
	} while (0)

And I suspect you need #ifdef CONFIG_LOCKDEP which should fix the kbuild
bot error.


Yes.

But honestly I would prefer to have lockdep_assert_not_held() in
include/linux/lockdep.h, much cleaner that way. Also
i915_gem_object_lookup_rcu() could then use the same macro.


Right. This is the right way to go. That was first instinct and
decided to have the discussion evolve in that direction. Now that
it has, I will combine this change with
include/linux/lockdep.h and add lockdep_assert_not_held()

I think we might have other places in the kernel that could use
lockdep_assert_not_held() in addition to i915_gem_object_lookup_rcu()


I looked at i915_gem_object_lookup_rcu(). The following can be replaced
by lockdep_assert_held().

#ifdef CONFIG_LOCKDEP
        WARN_ON(debug_locks && !lock_is_held(&rcu_lock_map));
#endif

Great, thank you. The only problem is that lockdep.h changes have to go
via some other tree, I just don't know which :) I think it would be
easiest if also the ath10k patch goes via that other tree, I can ack the
ath10k changes.

Another option is that I'll apply the ath10k patch after the lockdep.h
change has trickled down to my tree, but that usually happens only after
the merge window and means weeks of waiting. Either is fine for me.


I will send the include/linux/lockdep.h and ath10k patch together and
we will take it from there.

thanks,
-- Shuah



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Host AP]     [ATH6KL]     [Linux Wireless Personal Area Network]     [Linux Bluetooth]     [Wireless Regulations]     [Linux Netdev]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Linux Kernel]     [IDE]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite Hiking]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]

  Powered by Linux