lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Apr]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v4] kernel/resource: Fix locking in request_free_mem_region
From
Date
On 16.04.21 06:19, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 7:58 PM Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com> wrote:
>>
>> request_free_mem_region() is used to find an empty range of physical
>> addresses for hotplugging ZONE_DEVICE memory. It does this by iterating
>> over the range of possible addresses using region_intersects() to see if
>> the range is free.
>>
>> region_intersects() obtains a read lock before walking the resource tree
>> to protect against concurrent changes. However it drops the lock prior
>> to returning. This means by the time request_mem_region() is called in
>> request_free_mem_region() another thread may have already reserved the
>> requested region resulting in unexpected failures and a message in the
>> kernel log from hitting this condition:
>>
>> /*
>> * mm/hmm.c reserves physical addresses which then
>> * become unavailable to other users. Conflicts are
>> * not expected. Warn to aid debugging if encountered.
>> */
>> if (conflict->desc == IORES_DESC_DEVICE_PRIVATE_MEMORY) {
>> pr_warn("Unaddressable device %s %pR conflicts with %pR",
>> conflict->name, conflict, res);
>>
>> To fix this create versions of region_intersects() and
>> request_mem_region() that allow the caller to take the appropriate lock
>> such that it may be held over the required calls.
>>
>> Instead of creating another version of devm_request_mem_region() that
>> doesn't take the lock open-code it to allow the caller to pre-allocate
>> the required memory prior to taking the lock.
>>
>> On some architectures and kernel configurations revoke_iomem() also
>> calls resource code so cannot be called with the resource lock held.
>> Therefore call it only after dropping the lock.
>
> The patch is difficult to read because too many things are being
> changed at once, and the changelog seems to confirm that. Can you try
> breaking this down into a set of incremental changes? Not only will
> this ease review it will distribute any regressions over multiple
> bisection targets.
>
> Something like:
>
> * Refactor region_intersects() to allow external locking
> * Refactor __request_region() to allow external locking
> * Push revoke_iomem() down into...
> * Fix resource_lock usage in [devm_]request_free_mem_region()

+1


--
Thanks,

David / dhildenb

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-04-16 10:19    [W:0.051 / U:0.184 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site