mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@linaro.org>
To: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
Cc: Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"open list:THERMAL" <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: broken probe deferred for power-domains
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2019 01:26:16 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190228002616.GB19221@centauri.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAL_JsqKY3UHOf7w0o+8t7qwhOb3h8_MKVQQw-_xXL12gzb=iOQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 05:32:14PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 8:18 PM Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@linaro.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hello Rob,
> >
> > Your patch e01afc325025 ("PM / Domains: Stop deferring probe
> > at the end of initcall") breaks deferred probe for power domains.
> 
> With all the dependencies built-in, right?

Yep

> 
> What board in case I have one?

You probably do :) Dragonboard 410c.

It is reproducible very easily with branch: initcalls-for-robh
from this git:
https://git.linaro.org/people/niklas.cassel/kernel.git

ARCH=arm64 make defconfig

I recommend you to use trace_printk() when debugging drivers/base/dd.c,
since I've seen that printk can affect the timing so much that the issue
goes away :) (So don't forget to enable CONFIG_FTRACE).

> 
> > The patch looks like this:
> >
> > +++ b/drivers/base/power/domain.c
> > @@ -2253,7 +2253,7 @@ static int __genpd_dev_pm_attach(struct device *dev, struct device_node *np,
> >                 mutex_unlock(&gpd_list_lock);
> >                 dev_dbg(dev, "%s() failed to find PM domain: %ld\n",
> >                         __func__, PTR_ERR(pd));
> > -               return -EPROBE_DEFER;
> > +               return driver_deferred_probe_check_state(dev);
> >         }
> >
> >
> > Having two drivers (both using module_platform_driver),
> > one being a PD provider and one being a PD consumer.
> >
> > Before your patch:
> > The PD consumer driver calls dev_pm_domain_attach(),
> > and gets EPROBE_DEFER until the PD provider driver
> > has been probed successfully.
> >
> > (The PD provider driver needs some regulators, so it
> > is only successfully probed after the regulator driver
> > has been probed successfully.)
> >
> > Anyway, dev_pm_domain_attach() returned success after
> > the some deferred probes.
> >
> >
> > After your patch:
> > dev_pm_domain_attach() return ENODEV,
> > which comes from driver_deferred_probe_check_state().
> > Since it returns ENODEV rather than EPROBE_DEFER,
> > the PD consumer driver fails to probe.
> >
> >
> > The problem is related to your other patch 25b4e70dcce9
> > ("driver core: allow stopping deferred probe after init").
> >
> > driver_deferred_probe_check_state() returns ENODEV if
> > initcalls_done == true.
> >
> > initcalls_done is set from late_initcall(deferred_probe_initcall),
> > in drivers/base/dd.c:
> >        driver_deferred_probe_trigger();
> >        flush_work(&deferred_probe_work);
> >        initcalls_done = true;
> >
> > This does not seem very robust, since
> >
> > #1 It does not handle the case where two drivers have been
> > deferred (put in the deferred probe pending list),
> > where additionally one of the drivers has to be probed
> > before the other.
> >
> > (We would need to call driver_deferred_probe_trigger() + flush_work()
> > at least twice to handle this.)
> >
> > #2 Since this code is run from late_initcall(),
> > initcalls_done might get set before other drivers using late_initcall()
> > have even had a chance to run.
> 
> IMO, we should not have drivers using late_initcall. We need some
> level just to do things at the end of boot. The same fragility exists
> with the clock and regulator disabling.
> 
> > I can imagine that a driver using late_initcall() + EPROBE_DEFER
> > will absolutely not work with this code.
> >
> >
> > This patch fixes #1, but not #2.
> > However, I assume that even this change would not work if we have 3
> > drivers, where each driver a > b > c has to be probed, in that order.
> > (and all of them were placed in the deferred probe pending list).
> 
> I thought a successful probe would trigger a retry too. I need to look
> at it again.

That is true, a successful probe does trigger a retry,
driver_bound() has a call to driver_deferred_probe_trigger(),
which calls schedule_work(&deferred_probe_work).

I guess what is missing is a call to flush_work(&deferred_probe_work)
after the work has been scheduled.

But since the flush_work() waits, I guess the additional flush_work()
has to be in deferred_probe_initcall(), and not in driver_bound().


Kind regards,
Niklas

> 
> Maybe it would be more robust to re-trigger probe until the pending
> list doesn't change. Then we could handle any length of dependencies.
> 
> >
> > Suggestions and patches are welcome.
> >
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/base/dd.c b/drivers/base/dd.c
> > index a823f469e53f..3443cb78be9b 100644
> > --- a/drivers/base/dd.c
> > +++ b/drivers/base/dd.c
> > @@ -288,7 +288,6 @@ static int deferred_probe_initcall(void)
> >         driver_deferred_probe_trigger();
> >         /* Sort as many dependencies as possible before exiting initcalls */
> >         flush_work(&deferred_probe_work);
> > -       initcalls_done = true;
> >
> >         /*
> >          * Trigger deferred probe again, this time we won't defer anything
> > @@ -297,6 +296,8 @@ static int deferred_probe_initcall(void)
> >         driver_deferred_probe_trigger();
> >         flush_work(&deferred_probe_work);
> >
> > +       initcalls_done = true;
> > +
> >         if (deferred_probe_timeout > 0) {
> >                 schedule_delayed_work(&deferred_probe_timeout_work,
> >                         deferred_probe_timeout * HZ);
> >
> >
> >
> > Kind regards,
> > Niklas

      reply	other threads:[~2019-02-28  0:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-02-27  2:18 Niklas Cassel
2019-02-27 23:32 ` Rob Herring
2019-02-28  0:26   ` Niklas Cassel [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20190228002616.GB19221@centauri.lan \
    --to=niklas.cassel@linaro.org \
    --cc=agraf@suse.de \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    --cc=robh@kernel.org \
    --cc=ulf.hansson@linaro.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

Powered by JetHome