[net,V3,2/3] vhost_net: switch to use mutex_trylock() in vhost_net_busy_poll()
diff mbox series

Message ID 20181213025339.14023-3-jasowang@redhat.com
State Accepted
Commit 476e8ba712fa6a479192dfc4301cd3765d9ba713
Headers show
Series
  • Fix various issue of vhost
Related show

Commit Message

Jason Wang Dec. 13, 2018, 2:53 a.m. UTC
We used to hold the mutex of paired virtqueue in
vhost_net_busy_poll(). But this will results an inconsistent lock
order which may cause deadlock if we try to bring back the protection
of device IOTLB with vq mutex that requires to hold mutex of all
virtqueues at the same time.

Fix this simply by switching to use mutex_trylock(), when fail just
skip the busy polling. This can happen when device IOTLB is under
updating which should be rare.

Fixes: commit 78139c94dc8c ("net: vhost: lock the vqs one by one")
Cc: Tonghao Zhang <xiangxia.m.yue@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
---
 drivers/vhost/net.c | 8 +++++++-
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

Patch
diff mbox series

diff --git a/drivers/vhost/net.c b/drivers/vhost/net.c
index ab11b2bee273..ad7a6f475a44 100644
--- a/drivers/vhost/net.c
+++ b/drivers/vhost/net.c
@@ -513,7 +513,13 @@  static void vhost_net_busy_poll(struct vhost_net *net,
 	struct socket *sock;
 	struct vhost_virtqueue *vq = poll_rx ? tvq : rvq;
 
-	mutex_lock_nested(&vq->mutex, poll_rx ? VHOST_NET_VQ_TX: VHOST_NET_VQ_RX);
+	/* Try to hold the vq mutex of the paired virtqueue. We can't
+	 * use mutex_lock() here since we could not guarantee a
+	 * consistenet lock ordering.
+	 */
+	if (!mutex_trylock(&vq->mutex))
+		return;
+
 	vhost_disable_notify(&net->dev, vq);
 	sock = rvq->private_data;