[Intel-gfx] [RFC PATCH] drm/radeon: fixup locking inversion between mmap_sem and reservations
thellstrom at vmware.com
Tue Oct 8 18:29:35 CEST 2013
On 10/08/2013 04:55 PM, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 04:45:18PM +0200, Christian König wrote:
>> Am 08.10.2013 16:33, schrieb Jerome Glisse:
>>> On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 04:14:40PM +0200, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
>>>> Allocate and copy all kernel memory before doing reservations. This prevents a locking
>>>> inversion between mmap_sem and reservation_class, and allows us to drop the trylocking
>>>> in ttm_bo_vm_fault without upsetting lockdep.
>>>> Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst at canonical.com>
>>> I would say NAK. Current code only allocate temporary page in AGP case.
>>> So AGP case is userspace -> temp page -> cs checker -> radeon ib.
>>> Non AGP is directly memcpy to radeon IB.
>>> Your patch allocate memory memcpy userspace to it and it will then be
>>> memcpy to IB. Which means you introduce an extra memcpy in the process
>>> not something we want.
>> Totally agree. Additional to that there is no good reason to provide
>> anything else than anonymous system memory to the CS ioctl, so the
>> dependency between the mmap_sem and reservations are not really
>> clear to me.
> I think is that in other code path you take mmap_sem first then reserve
> bo. But here we reserve bo and then we take mmap_sem because of copy
> from user.
Actually the log message is a little confusing. I think the mmap_sem
locking inversion problem is orthogonal to what's being fixed here.
This patch fixes the possible recursive bo::reserve caused by malicious
user-space handing a pointer to ttm memory so that the ttm fault handler
is called when bos are already reserved. That may cause a (possibly
Once that is fixed, we are free to choose the mmap_sem -> bo::reserve
locking order. Currently it's bo::reserve->mmap_sem(), but the hack
required in the ttm fault handler is admittedly a bit ugly. The plan is
to change the locking order to mmap_sem->bo::reserve
I'm not sure if it applies to this particular case, but it should be
possible to make sure that copy_from_user_inatomic() will always
succeed, by making sure the pages are present using get_user_pages(),
and release the pages after copy_from_user_inatomic() is done. That way
there's no need for a double memcpy slowpath, but if the copied data is
very fragmented I guess the resulting code may look ugly. The
get_user_pages() function will return an error if it hits TTM pages.
More information about the Intel-gfx