xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Durrant, Paul" <pdurrant@amazon.com>
To: Sander Eikelenboom <linux@eikelenboom.it>,
	Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org" <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>,
	Paul Durrant <paul@xen.org>,
	Igor Druzhinin <igor.druzhinin@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] xen-unstable (4.14 to be): Assertion '!preempt_count()' failed at preempt.c:36
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2019 08:35:18 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <62b58da082e449eb960bada0ea34e3f9@EX13D32EUC003.ant.amazon.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <08b761ad-c84b-3dad-2dd1-f9b69b0fe2a7@eikelenboom.it>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Xen-devel <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org> On Behalf Of
> Sander Eikelenboom
> Sent: 04 December 2019 21:04
> To: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
> Cc: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Igor Druzhinin
> <igor.druzhinin@citrix.com>; Paul Durrant <paul@xen.org>
> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] xen-unstable (4.14 to be): Assertion
> '!preempt_count()' failed at preempt.c:36
> 
> On 04/12/2019 18:30, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > On 04.12.2019 18:21, Sander Eikelenboom wrote:
> >> On current xen-unstable (4.14 to be) and AMD cpu:
> >>
> >> After rebooting the host, while the guests are starting, I hit the
> assertion below.
> >> xen-staging-4.13 seems fine on the same machine.
> >
> > Nothing between 4.13 RC4 and the tip of staging stands out,
> > so I wonder if you could bisect over this range? Or perhaps
> > someone else sees something I don't see (right now).
> >
> > Jan
> 
> Bisection came up with:
> 
> commit cd7dedad8209753e0fc8a97e61d04b74912b53dc
> Author: Paul Durrant <paul.durrant@citrix.com>
> Date:   Fri Nov 15 18:59:30 2019 +0000
> 
>     passthrough: simplify locking and logging
> 
>     Dropping the pcidevs lock between calling device_assigned() and
>     assign_device() means that the latter has to do the same check as the
>     former for no obvious gain. Also, since long running operations under
>     pcidevs lock already drop the lock and return -ERESTART periodically
> there
>     is little point in immediately failing an assignment operation with
>     -ERESTART just because the pcidevs lock could not be acquired (for the
>     second time, having already blocked on acquiring the lock in
>     device_assigned()).
> 
>     This patch instead acquires the lock once for assignment (or test
> assign)
>     operations directly in iommu_do_pci_domctl() and thus can remove the
>     duplicate domain ownership check in assign_device(). Whilst in the
>     neighbourhood, the patch also removes some debug logging from
>     assign_device() and deassign_device() and replaces it with proper
> error
>     logging, which allows error logging in iommu_do_pci_domctl() to be
>     removed.
> 
>     Signed-off-by: Paul Durrant <paul.durrant@citrix.com>
>     Signed-off-by: Igor Druzhinin <igor.druzhinin@citrix.com>
>     Acked-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
> 

Going through the code, I notice a missing pcidevs_unlock() in the case of a device already assigned. I fixed it with a bit of re-structuring. Could you try the following patch?

---8<---
diff --git a/xen/drivers/passthrough/pci.c b/xen/drivers/passthrough/pci.c
index ced0c28e4f..c7207998a5 100644
--- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/pci.c
+++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/pci.c
@@ -1696,16 +1696,12 @@ int iommu_do_pci_domctl(

         pcidevs_lock();
         ret = device_assigned(seg, bus, devfn);
-        if ( domctl->cmd == XEN_DOMCTL_test_assign_device )
+        if ( ret && domctl->cmd == XEN_DOMCTL_test_assign_device )
         {
-            if ( ret )
-            {
-                printk(XENLOG_G_INFO
-                       "%04x:%02x:%02x.%u already assigned, or non-existent\n",
-                       seg, bus, PCI_SLOT(devfn), PCI_FUNC(devfn));
-                ret = -EINVAL;
-            }
-            break;
+            printk(XENLOG_G_INFO
+                   "%04x:%02x:%02x.%u already assigned, or non-existent\n",
+                   seg, bus, PCI_SLOT(devfn), PCI_FUNC(devfn));
+            ret = -EINVAL;
         }
---8<---

Thanks,

  Paul


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel

  reply	other threads:[~2019-12-05  8:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-12-04 17:21 [Xen-devel] xen-unstable (4.14 to be): Assertion '!preempt_count()' failed at preempt.c:36 Sander Eikelenboom
2019-12-04 17:30 ` Jan Beulich
2019-12-04 21:03   ` Sander Eikelenboom
2019-12-05  8:35     ` Durrant, Paul [this message]
2019-12-05  8:43       ` Jan Beulich
2019-12-05  8:47         ` Durrant, Paul

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=62b58da082e449eb960bada0ea34e3f9@EX13D32EUC003.ant.amazon.com \
    --to=pdurrant@amazon.com \
    --cc=igor.druzhinin@citrix.com \
    --cc=jbeulich@suse.com \
    --cc=linux@eikelenboom.it \
    --cc=paul@xen.org \
    --cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).