1. 24 10月, 2011 1 次提交
  2. 20 10月, 2011 3 次提交
  3. 19 10月, 2011 11 次提交
  4. 18 10月, 2011 4 次提交
  5. 16 10月, 2011 1 次提交
  6. 15 10月, 2011 3 次提交
  7. 14 10月, 2011 3 次提交
  8. 13 10月, 2011 1 次提交
  9. 11 10月, 2011 4 次提交
    • R
      intel-iommu: Fix AB-BA lockdep report · 3e7abe25
      Roland Dreier 提交于
      When unbinding a device so that I could pass it through to a KVM VM, I
      got the lockdep report below.  It looks like a legitimate lock
      ordering problem:
      
       - domain_context_mapping_one() takes iommu->lock and calls
         iommu_support_dev_iotlb(), which takes device_domain_lock (inside
         iommu->lock).
      
       - domain_remove_one_dev_info() starts by taking device_domain_lock
         then takes iommu->lock inside it (near the end of the function).
      
      So this is the classic AB-BA deadlock.  It looks like a safe fix is to
      simply release device_domain_lock a bit earlier, since as far as I can
      tell, it doesn't protect any of the stuff accessed at the end of
      domain_remove_one_dev_info() anyway.
      
      BTW, the use of device_domain_lock looks a bit unsafe to me... it's
      at least not obvious to me why we aren't vulnerable to the race below:
      
        iommu_support_dev_iotlb()
                                                domain_remove_dev_info()
      
        lock device_domain_lock
          find info
        unlock device_domain_lock
      
                                                lock device_domain_lock
                                                  find same info
                                                unlock device_domain_lock
      
                                                free_devinfo_mem(info)
      
        do stuff with info after it's free
      
      However I don't understand the locking here well enough to know if
      this is a real problem, let alone what the best fix is.
      
      Anyway here's the full lockdep output that prompted all of this:
      
           =======================================================
           [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
           2.6.39.1+ #1
           -------------------------------------------------------
           bash/13954 is trying to acquire lock:
            (&(&iommu->lock)->rlock){......}, at: [<ffffffff812f6421>] domain_remove_one_dev_info+0x121/0x230
      
           but task is already holding lock:
            (device_domain_lock){-.-...}, at: [<ffffffff812f6508>] domain_remove_one_dev_info+0x208/0x230
      
           which lock already depends on the new lock.
      
           the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
      
           -> #1 (device_domain_lock){-.-...}:
                  [<ffffffff8109ca9d>] lock_acquire+0x9d/0x130
                  [<ffffffff81571475>] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x55/0xa0
                  [<ffffffff812f8350>] domain_context_mapping_one+0x600/0x750
                  [<ffffffff812f84df>] domain_context_mapping+0x3f/0x120
                  [<ffffffff812f9175>] iommu_prepare_identity_map+0x1c5/0x1e0
                  [<ffffffff81ccf1ca>] intel_iommu_init+0x88e/0xb5e
                  [<ffffffff81cab204>] pci_iommu_init+0x16/0x41
                  [<ffffffff81002165>] do_one_initcall+0x45/0x190
                  [<ffffffff81ca3d3f>] kernel_init+0xe3/0x168
                  [<ffffffff8157ac24>] kernel_thread_helper+0x4/0x10
      
           -> #0 (&(&iommu->lock)->rlock){......}:
                  [<ffffffff8109bf3e>] __lock_acquire+0x195e/0x1e10
                  [<ffffffff8109ca9d>] lock_acquire+0x9d/0x130
                  [<ffffffff81571475>] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x55/0xa0
                  [<ffffffff812f6421>] domain_remove_one_dev_info+0x121/0x230
                  [<ffffffff812f8b42>] device_notifier+0x72/0x90
                  [<ffffffff8157555c>] notifier_call_chain+0x8c/0xc0
                  [<ffffffff81089768>] __blocking_notifier_call_chain+0x78/0xb0
                  [<ffffffff810897b6>] blocking_notifier_call_chain+0x16/0x20
                  [<ffffffff81373a5c>] __device_release_driver+0xbc/0xe0
                  [<ffffffff81373ccf>] device_release_driver+0x2f/0x50
                  [<ffffffff81372ee3>] driver_unbind+0xa3/0xc0
                  [<ffffffff813724ac>] drv_attr_store+0x2c/0x30
                  [<ffffffff811e4506>] sysfs_write_file+0xe6/0x170
                  [<ffffffff8117569e>] vfs_write+0xce/0x190
                  [<ffffffff811759e4>] sys_write+0x54/0xa0
                  [<ffffffff81579a82>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
      
           other info that might help us debug this:
      
           6 locks held by bash/13954:
            #0:  (&buffer->mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff811e4464>] sysfs_write_file+0x44/0x170
            #1:  (s_active#3){++++.+}, at: [<ffffffff811e44ed>] sysfs_write_file+0xcd/0x170
            #2:  (&__lockdep_no_validate__){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff81372edb>] driver_unbind+0x9b/0xc0
            #3:  (&__lockdep_no_validate__){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff81373cc7>] device_release_driver+0x27/0x50
            #4:  (&(&priv->bus_notifier)->rwsem){.+.+.+}, at: [<ffffffff8108974f>] __blocking_notifier_call_chain+0x5f/0xb0
            #5:  (device_domain_lock){-.-...}, at: [<ffffffff812f6508>] domain_remove_one_dev_info+0x208/0x230
      
           stack backtrace:
           Pid: 13954, comm: bash Not tainted 2.6.39.1+ #1
           Call Trace:
            [<ffffffff810993a7>] print_circular_bug+0xf7/0x100
            [<ffffffff8109bf3e>] __lock_acquire+0x195e/0x1e10
            [<ffffffff810972bd>] ? trace_hardirqs_off+0xd/0x10
            [<ffffffff8109d57d>] ? trace_hardirqs_on_caller+0x13d/0x180
            [<ffffffff8109ca9d>] lock_acquire+0x9d/0x130
            [<ffffffff812f6421>] ? domain_remove_one_dev_info+0x121/0x230
            [<ffffffff81571475>] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x55/0xa0
            [<ffffffff812f6421>] ? domain_remove_one_dev_info+0x121/0x230
            [<ffffffff810972bd>] ? trace_hardirqs_off+0xd/0x10
            [<ffffffff812f6421>] domain_remove_one_dev_info+0x121/0x230
            [<ffffffff812f8b42>] device_notifier+0x72/0x90
            [<ffffffff8157555c>] notifier_call_chain+0x8c/0xc0
            [<ffffffff81089768>] __blocking_notifier_call_chain+0x78/0xb0
            [<ffffffff810897b6>] blocking_notifier_call_chain+0x16/0x20
            [<ffffffff81373a5c>] __device_release_driver+0xbc/0xe0
            [<ffffffff81373ccf>] device_release_driver+0x2f/0x50
            [<ffffffff81372ee3>] driver_unbind+0xa3/0xc0
            [<ffffffff813724ac>] drv_attr_store+0x2c/0x30
            [<ffffffff811e4506>] sysfs_write_file+0xe6/0x170
            [<ffffffff8117569e>] vfs_write+0xce/0x190
            [<ffffffff811759e4>] sys_write+0x54/0xa0
            [<ffffffff81579a82>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
      Signed-off-by: NRoland Dreier <roland@purestorage.com>
      Signed-off-by: NDavid Woodhouse <David.Woodhouse@intel.com>
      3e7abe25
    • W
      mscan: too much data copied to CAN frame due to 16 bit accesses · a3a4bfde
      Wolfgang Grandegger 提交于
      Due to the 16 bit access to mscan registers there's too much data copied to
      the zero initialized CAN frame when having an odd number of bytes to copy.
      This patch ensures that only the requested bytes are copied by using an
      8 bit access for the remaining byte.
      Reported-by: NAndre Naujoks <nautsch@gmail.com>
      Signed-off-by: NOliver Hartkopp <socketcan@hartkopp.net>
      Signed-off-by: NWolfgang Grandegger <wg@grandegger.com>
      Signed-off-by: NDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
      a3a4bfde
    • D
      bnx2x: fix cl_id allocation for non-eth clients for NPAR mode · 134d0f97
      Dmitry Kravkov 提交于
      There are some consolidations of NPAR configuration
      when FCoE and iSCSI L2 clients will get the same id,
      in this case FCoE ring will be non-functional.
      Signed-off-by: NDmitry Kravkov <dmitry@broadcom.com>
      Signed-off-by: NEilon Greenstein <eilong@broadcom.com>
      Signed-off-by: NDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
      134d0f97
    • T
      mlx4_en: fix endianness with blue frame support · c5d6136e
      Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo 提交于
      The doorbell register was being unconditionally swapped. In x86, that
      meant it was being swapped to BE and written to the descriptor and to
      memory, depending on the case of blue frame support or writing to
      doorbell register. On PPC, this meant it was being swapped to LE and
      then swapped back to BE while writing to the register. But in the blue
      frame case, it was being written as LE to the descriptor.
      
      The fix is not to swap doorbell unconditionally, write it to the
      register as BE and convert it to BE when writing it to the descriptor.
      Signed-off-by: NThadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo <cascardo@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
      Reported-by: NRichard Hendrickson <richhend@us.ibm.com>
      Cc: Eli Cohen <eli@dev.mellanox.co.il>
      Cc: Yevgeny Petrilin <yevgenyp@mellanox.co.il>
      Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
      Signed-off-by: NDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
      c5d6136e
  10. 06 10月, 2011 1 次提交
  11. 05 10月, 2011 8 次提交