From patchwork Sun Feb 17 18:11:43 2019 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Andrew Lunn X-Patchwork-Id: 1043704 X-Patchwork-Delegate: davem@davemloft.net Return-Path: X-Original-To: patchwork-incoming-netdev@ozlabs.org Delivered-To: patchwork-incoming-netdev@ozlabs.org Authentication-Results: ozlabs.org; spf=none (mailfrom) smtp.mailfrom=vger.kernel.org (client-ip=209.132.180.67; helo=vger.kernel.org; envelope-from=netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org; receiver=) Authentication-Results: ozlabs.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=lunn.ch Authentication-Results: ozlabs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=lunn.ch header.i=@lunn.ch header.b="wQhWiPE8"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 442ZtH2vqQz9s9G for ; Mon, 18 Feb 2019 05:15:34 +1100 (AEDT) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728111AbfBQSMJ (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 Feb 2019 13:12:09 -0500 Received: from vps0.lunn.ch ([185.16.172.187]:55817 "EHLO vps0.lunn.ch" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725811AbfBQSMJ (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 Feb 2019 13:12:09 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lunn.ch; s=20171124; h=Message-Id:Date:Subject:Cc:To:From:Sender:Reply-To:MIME-Version :Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: In-Reply-To:References:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=jWbmurME5KFxiW/f6pVbmS6+E5JwIQboOCY16QsR7oQ=; b=wQhWiPE8gUzv5aLDUcFPJRqqJs RlHn3Vvo5y7GkcMtGJMtnbJTUZ+lQtJN9eYcEDk+nCagBdwh1qJdNknrgHb0XuQlfIzQm5zWocyx4 JeD4R5eDh1MX84GVRP51wvsOHNIaCWM/XBN8u0GqrHNSoq+m9M4Z3TJD/mm+BnlAwZMc=; Received: from andrew by vps0.lunn.ch with local (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gvQuq-0003re-Rg; Sun, 17 Feb 2019 19:11:48 +0100 From: Andrew Lunn To: Russell King Cc: netdev , Vivien Didelot , Andrew Lunn Subject: [PATCH] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: Add lockdep classes to fix false positive splat Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2019 19:11:43 +0100 Message-Id: <20190217181143.14817-1-andrew@lunn.ch> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.11.0 Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org The following false positive lockdep splat has been observed. ====================================================== WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected 4.20.0+ #302 Not tainted ------------------------------------------------------ systemd-udevd/160 is trying to acquire lock: edea6080 (&chip->reg_lock){+.+.}, at: __setup_irq+0x640/0x704 but task is already holding lock: edff0340 (&desc->request_mutex){+.+.}, at: __setup_irq+0xa0/0x704 which lock already depends on the new lock. the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is: -> #1 (&desc->request_mutex){+.+.}: mutex_lock_nested+0x1c/0x24 __setup_irq+0xa0/0x704 request_threaded_irq+0xd0/0x150 mv88e6xxx_probe+0x41c/0x694 [mv88e6xxx] mdio_probe+0x2c/0x54 really_probe+0x200/0x2c4 driver_probe_device+0x5c/0x174 __driver_attach+0xd8/0xdc bus_for_each_dev+0x58/0x7c bus_add_driver+0xe4/0x1f0 driver_register+0x7c/0x110 mdio_driver_register+0x24/0x58 do_one_initcall+0x74/0x2e8 do_init_module+0x60/0x1d0 load_module+0x1968/0x1ff4 sys_finit_module+0x8c/0x98 ret_fast_syscall+0x0/0x28 0xbedf2ae8 -> #0 (&chip->reg_lock){+.+.}: __mutex_lock+0x50/0x8b8 mutex_lock_nested+0x1c/0x24 __setup_irq+0x640/0x704 request_threaded_irq+0xd0/0x150 mv88e6xxx_g2_irq_setup+0xcc/0x1b4 [mv88e6xxx] mv88e6xxx_probe+0x44c/0x694 [mv88e6xxx] mdio_probe+0x2c/0x54 really_probe+0x200/0x2c4 driver_probe_device+0x5c/0x174 __driver_attach+0xd8/0xdc bus_for_each_dev+0x58/0x7c bus_add_driver+0xe4/0x1f0 driver_register+0x7c/0x110 mdio_driver_register+0x24/0x58 do_one_initcall+0x74/0x2e8 do_init_module+0x60/0x1d0 load_module+0x1968/0x1ff4 sys_finit_module+0x8c/0x98 ret_fast_syscall+0x0/0x28 0xbedf2ae8 other info that might help us debug this: Possible unsafe locking scenario: CPU0 CPU1 ---- ---- lock(&desc->request_mutex); lock(&chip->reg_lock); lock(&desc->request_mutex); lock(&chip->reg_lock); &desc->request_mutex refer to two different mutex. #1 is the GPIO for the chip interrupt. #2 is the chained interrupt between global 1 and global 2. Add lockdep classes to the GPIO interrupt to avoid this. Reported-by: Russell King Signed-off-by: Andrew Lunn --- Hi Russell Does this fix it for you on Clearfog? drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/chip.c | 8 ++++++++ 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) diff --git a/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/chip.c b/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/chip.c index 32e7af5caa69..936d53a92144 100644 --- a/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/chip.c +++ b/drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/chip.c @@ -442,12 +442,20 @@ static int mv88e6xxx_g1_irq_setup_common(struct mv88e6xxx_chip *chip) static int mv88e6xxx_g1_irq_setup(struct mv88e6xxx_chip *chip) { + static struct lock_class_key lock_key; + static struct lock_class_key request_key; int err; err = mv88e6xxx_g1_irq_setup_common(chip); if (err) return err; + /* These lock classes tells lockdep that global 1 irqs are in + * a different category than their parent GPIO, so it won't + * report false recursion. + */ + irq_set_lockdep_class(chip->irq, &lock_key, &request_key); + err = request_threaded_irq(chip->irq, NULL, mv88e6xxx_g1_irq_thread_fn, IRQF_ONESHOT | IRQF_SHARED,