On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 4:05 AM Daniel Vetter daniel@ffwll.ch wrote:
On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 11:12:02AM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
Lockdep reports a circular locking dependency with pages_lock taken in the shrinker callback. The deadlock can't actually happen with current users at least as a BO will never be purgeable when pages_lock is held. To be safe, let's use mutex_trylock() instead and bail if a BO is locked already.
WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected 5.3.0-rc1+ #100 Tainted: G L
kswapd0/171 is trying to acquire lock: 000000009b9823fd (&shmem->pages_lock){+.+.}, at: drm_gem_shmem_purge+0x20/0x40
but task is already holding lock: 00000000f82369b6 (fs_reclaim){+.+.}, at: __fs_reclaim_acquire+0x0/0x40
which lock already depends on the new lock.
the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
-> #1 (fs_reclaim){+.+.}: fs_reclaim_acquire.part.18+0x34/0x40 fs_reclaim_acquire+0x20/0x28 __kmalloc_node+0x6c/0x4c0 kvmalloc_node+0x38/0xa8 drm_gem_get_pages+0x80/0x1d0 drm_gem_shmem_get_pages+0x58/0xa0 drm_gem_shmem_get_pages_sgt+0x48/0xd0 panfrost_mmu_map+0x38/0xf8 [panfrost] panfrost_gem_open+0xc0/0xe8 [panfrost] drm_gem_handle_create_tail+0xe8/0x198 drm_gem_handle_create+0x3c/0x50 panfrost_gem_create_with_handle+0x70/0xa0 [panfrost] panfrost_ioctl_create_bo+0x48/0x80 [panfrost] drm_ioctl_kernel+0xb8/0x110 drm_ioctl+0x244/0x3f0 do_vfs_ioctl+0xbc/0x910 ksys_ioctl+0x78/0xa8 __arm64_sys_ioctl+0x1c/0x28 el0_svc_common.constprop.0+0x90/0x168 el0_svc_handler+0x28/0x78 el0_svc+0x8/0xc
-> #0 (&shmem->pages_lock){+.+.}: __lock_acquire+0xa2c/0x1d70 lock_acquire+0xdc/0x228 __mutex_lock+0x8c/0x800 mutex_lock_nested+0x1c/0x28 drm_gem_shmem_purge+0x20/0x40 panfrost_gem_shrinker_scan+0xc0/0x180 [panfrost] do_shrink_slab+0x208/0x500 shrink_slab+0x10c/0x2c0 shrink_node+0x28c/0x4d8 balance_pgdat+0x2c8/0x570 kswapd+0x22c/0x638 kthread+0x128/0x130 ret_from_fork+0x10/0x18
other info that might help us debug this:
Possible unsafe locking scenario:
CPU0 CPU1 ---- ----lock(fs_reclaim); lock(&shmem->pages_lock); lock(fs_reclaim); lock(&shmem->pages_lock);
*** DEADLOCK ***
3 locks held by kswapd0/171: #0: 00000000f82369b6 (fs_reclaim){+.+.}, at: __fs_reclaim_acquire+0x0/0x40 #1: 00000000ceb37808 (shrinker_rwsem){++++}, at: shrink_slab+0xbc/0x2c0 #2: 00000000f31efa81 (&pfdev->shrinker_lock){+.+.}, at: panfrost_gem_shrinker_scan+0x34/0x180 [panfrost]
Fixes: 17acb9f35ed7 ("drm/shmem: Add madvise state and purge helpers") Cc: Maarten Lankhorst maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com Cc: Maxime Ripard maxime.ripard@bootlin.com Cc: Sean Paul sean@poorly.run Cc: David Airlie airlied@linux.ie Cc: Daniel Vetter daniel@ffwll.ch Signed-off-by: Rob Herring robh@kernel.org
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem_shmem_helper.c | 7 +++++-- include/drm/drm_gem_shmem_helper.h | 2 +- 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem_shmem_helper.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem_shmem_helper.c index 5423ec56b535..f5918707672f 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem_shmem_helper.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem_shmem_helper.c @@ -415,13 +415,16 @@ void drm_gem_shmem_purge_locked(struct drm_gem_object *obj) } EXPORT_SYMBOL(drm_gem_shmem_purge_locked);
-void drm_gem_shmem_purge(struct drm_gem_object *obj) +bool drm_gem_shmem_purge(struct drm_gem_object *obj) { struct drm_gem_shmem_object *shmem = to_drm_gem_shmem_obj(obj);
mutex_lock(&shmem->pages_lock);
if (!mutex_trylock(&shmem->pages_lock))Did you see my ping about cutting all the locking over to dma_resv?
Yes, but you didn't reply to Rob C. about it. I guess I'll have to go figure out how reservation objects work...
Would align shmem helpers with ttm a lot more, for that bright glorious future taste. Should we capture that in some todo.rst entry?
Sure.
Rob