Skip to content

Commit 410ce37

Browse files
TaeheeYooNipaLocal
authored and
NipaLocal
committed
eth: bnxt: fix deadlock when xdp is attached or detached
When xdp is attached or detached, dev->ndo_bpf() is called by do_setlink(), and it acquires netdev_lock() if needed. Unlike other drivers, the bnxt driver is protected by netdev_lock while xdp is attached/detached because it sets dev->request_ops_lock to true. So, the bnxt_xdp(), that is callback of ->ndo_bpf should not acquire netdev_lock(). But the xdp_features_{set | clear}_redirect_target() was changed to acquire netdev_lock() internally. It causes a deadlock. To fix this problem, bnxt driver should use xdp_features_{set | clear}_redirect_target_locked() instead. Splat looks like: ============================================ WARNING: possible recursive locking detected 6.15.0-rc6+ kernel-patches#1 Not tainted -------------------------------------------- bpftool/1745 is trying to acquire lock: ffff888131b85038 (&dev->lock){+.+.}-{4:4}, at: xdp_features_set_redirect_target+0x1f/0x80 but task is already holding lock: ffff888131b85038 (&dev->lock){+.+.}-{4:4}, at: do_setlink.constprop.0+0x24e/0x35d0 other info that might help us debug this: Possible unsafe locking scenario: CPU0 ---- lock(&dev->lock); lock(&dev->lock); *** DEADLOCK *** May be due to missing lock nesting notation 3 locks held by bpftool/1745: #0: ffffffffa56131c8 (rtnl_mutex){+.+.}-{4:4}, at: rtnl_setlink+0x1fe/0x570 kernel-patches#1: ffffffffaafa75a0 (&net->rtnl_mutex){+.+.}-{4:4}, at: rtnl_setlink+0x236/0x570 kernel-patches#2: ffff888131b85038 (&dev->lock){+.+.}-{4:4}, at: do_setlink.constprop.0+0x24e/0x35d0 stack backtrace: CPU: 1 UID: 0 PID: 1745 Comm: bpftool Not tainted 6.15.0-rc6+ kernel-patches#1 PREEMPT(undef) Hardware name: ASUS System Product Name/PRIME Z690-P D4, BIOS 0603 11/01/2021 Call Trace: <TASK> dump_stack_lvl+0x7a/0xd0 print_deadlock_bug+0x294/0x3d0 __lock_acquire+0x153b/0x28f0 lock_acquire+0x184/0x340 ? xdp_features_set_redirect_target+0x1f/0x80 __mutex_lock+0x1ac/0x18a0 ? xdp_features_set_redirect_target+0x1f/0x80 ? xdp_features_set_redirect_target+0x1f/0x80 ? __pfx_bnxt_rx_page_skb+0x10/0x10 [bnxt_en ? __pfx___mutex_lock+0x10/0x10 ? __pfx_netdev_update_features+0x10/0x10 ? bnxt_set_rx_skb_mode+0x284/0x540 [bnxt_en ? __pfx_bnxt_set_rx_skb_mode+0x10/0x10 [bnxt_en ? xdp_features_set_redirect_target+0x1f/0x80 xdp_features_set_redirect_target+0x1f/0x80 bnxt_xdp+0x34e/0x730 [bnxt_en 11cbcce8fa11cff1dddd7ef358d6219e4ca9add3] dev_xdp_install+0x3f4/0x830 ? __pfx_bnxt_xdp+0x10/0x10 [bnxt_en 11cbcce8fa11cff1dddd7ef358d6219e4ca9add3] ? __pfx_dev_xdp_install+0x10/0x10 dev_xdp_attach+0x560/0xf70 dev_change_xdp_fd+0x22d/0x280 do_setlink.constprop.0+0x2989/0x35d0 ? __pfx_do_setlink.constprop.0+0x10/0x10 ? lock_acquire+0x184/0x340 ? find_held_lock+0x32/0x90 ? rtnl_setlink+0x236/0x570 ? rcu_is_watching+0x11/0xb0 ? trace_contention_end+0xdc/0x120 ? __mutex_lock+0x946/0x18a0 ? __pfx___mutex_lock+0x10/0x10 ? __lock_acquire+0xa95/0x28f0 ? rcu_is_watching+0x11/0xb0 ? rcu_is_watching+0x11/0xb0 ? cap_capable+0x172/0x350 rtnl_setlink+0x2cd/0x570 Fixes: 03df156 ("xdp: double protect netdev->xdp_flags with netdev->lock") Signed-off-by: Taehee Yoo <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Michael Chan <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: NipaLocal <nipa@local>
1 parent 4ff6540 commit 410ce37

File tree

1 file changed

+2
-2
lines changed

1 file changed

+2
-2
lines changed

drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnxt/bnxt_xdp.c

Lines changed: 2 additions & 2 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -425,9 +425,9 @@ static int bnxt_xdp_set(struct bnxt *bp, struct bpf_prog *prog)
425425

426426
if (prog) {
427427
bnxt_set_rx_skb_mode(bp, true);
428-
xdp_features_set_redirect_target(dev, true);
428+
xdp_features_set_redirect_target_locked(dev, true);
429429
} else {
430-
xdp_features_clear_redirect_target(dev);
430+
xdp_features_clear_redirect_target_locked(dev);
431431
bnxt_set_rx_skb_mode(bp, false);
432432
}
433433
bp->tx_nr_rings_xdp = tx_xdp;

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)