From: "A. Sverdlin" <alexander.sverdlin@siemens.com>
To: netdev@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Alexander Sverdlin <alexander.sverdlin@siemens.com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@gmail.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
Juergen Beisert <jbe@pengutronix.de>,
Jerry Ray <jerry.ray@microchip.com>,
Mans Rullgard <mans@mansr.com>,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH] net: dsa: lan9303: consequently nested-lock physical MDIO
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2023 08:57:38 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231027065741.534971-1-alexander.sverdlin@siemens.com> (raw)
From: Alexander Sverdlin <alexander.sverdlin@siemens.com>
When LAN9303 is MDIO-connected two callchains exist into
mdio->bus->write():
1. switch ports 1&2 ("physical" PHYs):
virtual (switch-internal) MDIO bus (lan9303_switch_ops->phy_{read|write})->
lan9303_mdio_phy_{read|write} -> mdiobus_{read|write}_nested
2. LAN9303 virtual PHY:
virtual MDIO bus (lan9303_phy_{read|write}) ->
lan9303_virt_phy_reg_{read|write} -> regmap -> lan9303_mdio_{read|write}
If the latter functions just take
mutex_lock(&sw_dev->device->bus->mdio_lock) it triggers a LOCKDEP
false-positive splat. It's false-positive because the first
mdio_lock in the second callchain above belongs to virtual MDIO bus, the
second mdio_lock belongs to physical MDIO bus.
Consequent annotation in lan9303_mdio_{read|write} as nested lock
(similar to lan9303_mdio_phy_{read|write}, it's the same physical MDIO bus)
prevents the following splat:
WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
5.15.71 #1 Not tainted
------------------------------------------------------
kworker/u4:3/609 is trying to acquire lock:
ffff000011531c68 (lan9303_mdio:131:(&lan9303_mdio_regmap_config)->lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: regmap_lock_mutex
but task is already holding lock:
ffff0000114c44d8 (&bus->mdio_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: mdiobus_read
which lock already depends on the new lock.
the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
-> #1 (&bus->mdio_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}:
lock_acquire
__mutex_lock
mutex_lock_nested
lan9303_mdio_read
_regmap_read
regmap_read
lan9303_probe
lan9303_mdio_probe
mdio_probe
really_probe
__driver_probe_device
driver_probe_device
__device_attach_driver
bus_for_each_drv
__device_attach
device_initial_probe
bus_probe_device
deferred_probe_work_func
process_one_work
worker_thread
kthread
ret_from_fork
-> #0 (lan9303_mdio:131:(&lan9303_mdio_regmap_config)->lock){+.+.}-{3:3}:
__lock_acquire
lock_acquire.part.0
lock_acquire
__mutex_lock
mutex_lock_nested
regmap_lock_mutex
regmap_read
lan9303_phy_read
dsa_slave_phy_read
__mdiobus_read
mdiobus_read
get_phy_device
mdiobus_scan
__mdiobus_register
dsa_register_switch
lan9303_probe
lan9303_mdio_probe
mdio_probe
really_probe
__driver_probe_device
driver_probe_device
__device_attach_driver
bus_for_each_drv
__device_attach
device_initial_probe
bus_probe_device
deferred_probe_work_func
process_one_work
worker_thread
kthread
ret_from_fork
other info that might help us debug this:
Possible unsafe locking scenario:
CPU0 CPU1
---- ----
lock(&bus->mdio_lock);
lock(lan9303_mdio:131:(&lan9303_mdio_regmap_config)->lock);
lock(&bus->mdio_lock);
lock(lan9303_mdio:131:(&lan9303_mdio_regmap_config)->lock);
*** DEADLOCK ***
5 locks held by kworker/u4:3/609:
#0: ffff000002842938 ((wq_completion)events_unbound){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: process_one_work
#1: ffff80000bacbd60 (deferred_probe_work){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: process_one_work
#2: ffff000007645178 (&dev->mutex){....}-{3:3}, at: __device_attach
#3: ffff8000096e6e78 (dsa2_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: dsa_register_switch
#4: ffff0000114c44d8 (&bus->mdio_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: mdiobus_read
stack backtrace:
CPU: 1 PID: 609 Comm: kworker/u4:3 Not tainted 5.15.71 #1
Workqueue: events_unbound deferred_probe_work_func
Call trace:
dump_backtrace
show_stack
dump_stack_lvl
dump_stack
print_circular_bug
check_noncircular
__lock_acquire
lock_acquire.part.0
lock_acquire
__mutex_lock
mutex_lock_nested
regmap_lock_mutex
regmap_read
lan9303_phy_read
dsa_slave_phy_read
__mdiobus_read
mdiobus_read
get_phy_device
mdiobus_scan
__mdiobus_register
dsa_register_switch
lan9303_probe
lan9303_mdio_probe
...
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Fixes: dc7005831523 ("net: dsa: LAN9303: add MDIO managed mode support")
Signed-off-by: Alexander Sverdlin <alexander.sverdlin@siemens.com>
---
Tested with v5.15 vendor kernel, compiled against net-next/main
(cc54d2e2c58a). Affected code is unchanged since original introduction in
2017.
drivers/net/dsa/lan9303_mdio.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/dsa/lan9303_mdio.c b/drivers/net/dsa/lan9303_mdio.c
index d8ab2b77d201..167a86f39f27 100644
--- a/drivers/net/dsa/lan9303_mdio.c
+++ b/drivers/net/dsa/lan9303_mdio.c
@@ -32,7 +32,7 @@ static int lan9303_mdio_write(void *ctx, uint32_t reg, uint32_t val)
struct lan9303_mdio *sw_dev = (struct lan9303_mdio *)ctx;
reg <<= 2; /* reg num to offset */
- mutex_lock(&sw_dev->device->bus->mdio_lock);
+ mutex_lock_nested(&sw_dev->device->bus->mdio_lock, MDIO_MUTEX_NESTED);
lan9303_mdio_real_write(sw_dev->device, reg, val & 0xffff);
lan9303_mdio_real_write(sw_dev->device, reg + 2, (val >> 16) & 0xffff);
mutex_unlock(&sw_dev->device->bus->mdio_lock);
@@ -50,7 +50,7 @@ static int lan9303_mdio_read(void *ctx, uint32_t reg, uint32_t *val)
struct lan9303_mdio *sw_dev = (struct lan9303_mdio *)ctx;
reg <<= 2; /* reg num to offset */
- mutex_lock(&sw_dev->device->bus->mdio_lock);
+ mutex_lock_nested(&sw_dev->device->bus->mdio_lock, MDIO_MUTEX_NESTED);
*val = lan9303_mdio_real_read(sw_dev->device, reg);
*val |= (lan9303_mdio_real_read(sw_dev->device, reg + 2) << 16);
mutex_unlock(&sw_dev->device->bus->mdio_lock);
--
2.41.0
next reply other threads:[~2023-10-27 6:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-10-27 6:57 A. Sverdlin [this message]
2023-10-27 11:55 ` [PATCH] net: dsa: lan9303: consequently nested-lock physical MDIO Andrew Lunn
2023-11-02 10:20 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
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=20231027065741.534971-1-alexander.sverdlin@siemens.com \
--to=alexander.sverdlin@siemens.com \
--cc=andrew@lunn.ch \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=f.fainelli@gmail.com \
--cc=jbe@pengutronix.de \
--cc=jerry.ray@microchip.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=mans@mansr.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=olteanv@gmail.com \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.