From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933843AbbDIMAd (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Apr 2015 08:00:33 -0400 Received: from mail-wi0-f174.google.com ([209.85.212.174]:35851 "EHLO mail-wi0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932667AbbDIMA3 (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Apr 2015 08:00:29 -0400 Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2015 14:00:23 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: jiang.liu@linux.intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, marc.zyngier@arm.com, hpa@zytor.com, tglx@linutronix.de Cc: linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [tip:irq/core] genirq: MSI: Fix freeing of unallocated MSI Message-ID: <20150409120023.GA12468@gmail.com> References: <1422299419-6051-1-git-send-email-marc.zyngier@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * tip-bot for Marc Zyngier wrote: > Commit-ID: fe0c52fc003bc046380e52fe6799c96d770770cc > Gitweb: http://git.kernel.org/tip/fe0c52fc003bc046380e52fe6799c96d770770cc > Author: Marc Zyngier > AuthorDate: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 19:10:19 +0000 > Committer: Thomas Gleixner > CommitDate: Wed, 8 Apr 2015 23:28:28 +0200 > > genirq: MSI: Fix freeing of unallocated MSI > > While debugging an unrelated issue with the GICv3 ITS driver, the > following trace triggered: > > WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 1 at kernel/irq/irqdomain.c:1121 irq_domain_free_irqs+0x160/0x17c() > NULL pointer, cannot free irq > Modules linked in: > CPU: 1 PID: 1 Comm: swapper/0 Tainted: G W 3.19.0-rc6+ #3690 > Hardware name: FVP Base (DT) > Call trace: > [] dump_backtrace+0x0/0x13c > [] show_stack+0x10/0x1c > [] dump_stack+0x74/0x94 > [] warn_slowpath_common+0x9c/0xd4 > [] warn_slowpath_fmt+0x5c/0x80 > [] irq_domain_free_irqs+0x15c/0x17c > [] msi_domain_free_irqs+0x58/0x74 > [] free_msi_irqs+0xb4/0x1c0 > > // The msi_prepare callback fails here > > [] pci_enable_msix+0x25c/0x3d4 > [] pci_enable_msix_range+0x34/0x80 > [] vp_try_to_find_vqs+0xec/0x528 > [] vp_find_vqs+0x6c/0xa8 > [] init_vq+0x120/0x248 > [] virtblk_probe+0xb0/0x6bc > [] virtio_dev_probe+0x17c/0x214 > [] driver_probe_device+0x7c/0x23c > [] __driver_attach+0x98/0xa0 > [] bus_for_each_dev+0x60/0xb4 > [] driver_attach+0x1c/0x28 > [] bus_add_driver+0x150/0x208 > [] driver_register+0x64/0x130 > [] register_virtio_driver+0x24/0x68 > [] init+0x70/0xac > [] do_one_initcall+0x94/0x1d0 > [] kernel_init_freeable+0x144/0x1e4 > [] kernel_init+0xc/0xd8 > ---[ end trace f9ee562a77cc7bae ]--- > > The ITS msi_prepare callback having failed, we end-up trying to > free MSIs that have never been allocated. Oddly enough, the kernel > is pretty upset about it. > > It turns out that this behaviour was expected before the MSI domain > was introduced (and dealt with in arch_teardown_msi_irqs). > > The obvious fix is to detect this early enough and bail out. > > Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier > Reviewed-by: Jiang Liu > Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1422299419-6051-1-git-send-email-marc.zyngier@arm.com > Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner > --- > kernel/irq/msi.c | 11 +++++++++-- > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/kernel/irq/msi.c b/kernel/irq/msi.c > index 3e18163..474de5c 100644 > --- a/kernel/irq/msi.c > +++ b/kernel/irq/msi.c > @@ -310,8 +310,15 @@ void msi_domain_free_irqs(struct irq_domain *domain, struct device *dev) > struct msi_desc *desc; > > for_each_msi_entry(desc, dev) { > - irq_domain_free_irqs(desc->irq, desc->nvec_used); > - desc->irq = 0; > + /* > + * We might have failed to allocate an MSI early nit: s/an MSI/an MSI interrupt > + * enough that there is no IRQ associated to this nit: s/to/with > + * entry. If that's the case, don't do anything. > + */ > + if (desc->irq) { > + irq_domain_free_irqs(desc->irq, desc->nvec_used); > + desc->irq = 0; > + } Hm, so this appears to be the first time that 'irq == 0' assumptions are getting into the genirq core. Is NO_IRQ dead? I realize that the MSI code uses '!irq' as a flag, but still, quite a few architectures define NO_IRQ so it appears to matter to them. Thanks, Ingo