On 2024-10-04, Petr Mladek <pmla...@suse.com> wrote:
> On Fri 2024-10-04 02:08:52, Breno Leitao wrote:
>>       =====================================================
>>       WARNING: HARDIRQ-safe -> HARDIRQ-unsafe lock order detected
>>       6.12.0-rc1-kbuilder-virtme-00033-gd4ac164bde7a #50 Not tainted
>>       -----------------------------------------------------
>>       swapper/0/1 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE0:SE1] is trying to acquire:
>>       ff1100010a260518 (_xmit_ETHER#2){+.-.}-{2:2}, at: virtnet_poll_tx 
>> (./include/linux/netdevice.h:4361 drivers/net/virtio_net.c:2969) 
>> 
>>      and this task is already holding:
>>       ffffffff86f2b5b8 (target_list_lock){....}-{2:2}, at: write_ext_msg 
>> (drivers/net/netconsole.c:?) 
>>       which would create a new lock dependency:
>>        (target_list_lock){....}-{2:2} -> (_xmit_ETHER#2){+.-.}-{2:2}
>> 
>>      but this new dependency connects a HARDIRQ-irq-safe lock:
>>        (console_owner){-...}-{0:0}

...

>>      to a HARDIRQ-irq-unsafe lock:
>>        (_xmit_ETHER#2){+.-.}-{2:2}

...

>>      other info that might help us debug this:
>> 
>>       Chain exists of:
>>      console_owner --> target_list_lock --> _xmit_ETHER#2
>> 
>>        Possible interrupt unsafe locking scenario:
>> 
>>              CPU0                    CPU1
>>              ----                    ----
>>         lock(_xmit_ETHER#2);
>>                                      local_irq_disable();
>>                                      lock(console_owner);
>>                                      lock(target_list_lock);
>>         <Interrupt>
>>           lock(console_owner);

I can trigger this lockdep splat on v6.11 as well.

It only requires a printk() call within any interrupt handler, sometime
after the netconsole is initialized and has had at least one run from
softirq context.

> My understanding is that the fix is to always take "_xmit_ETHER#2"
> lock with interrupts disabled.

That seems to be one possible solution. But maybe there is reasoning why
that should not be done. (??) Right now it is clearly a spinlock that is
being taken from both interrupt and softirq contexts and does not
disable interrupts.

I will check if there is some previous kernel release where this problem
does not exist.

John Ogness

Reply via email to