* [PATCH] thunderbolt: Do not RPM complete unrelated subtrees on unplug
@ 2026-10-04 2:26 Jonathan Gopel
2026-10-04 12:02 ` Mika Westerberg
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Jonathan Gopel @ 2026-10-04 2:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: andreas.noever, westeri, YehezkelShB
Cc: linux-usb, linux-kernel, Jonathan Gopel
When a Thunderbolt device is unplugged, that switch and every switch
subsequent to it on the bus device list is `complete()`d, not just its
child devices. In the case of multiple domains, it may cause, eg, an
attempt to `complete()` the uninitialized domain 1 root switch RPM
completion on unplug of a switch from domain 0 (though ordering is not
guaranteed numerically sorted).
I initially noticed this issue on a Dell XPS9720 when the system would
seem to sporadically not wake after unplugging a Thunderbolt dock. I
tried multiple kernel versions including v7.2.7 and v7.3-rc4 to see if
that resolved the issue, but the issue persisted. Eventually I found
that I could consistently generate a kernel Oops reporting a page fault
at 0xffff_ffff_ffff_fff8 on unplug from one side of the laptop and went
bug hunting. I became suspicious of the `bus_for_each_dev()` walk that I
ultimately ended up changing. To confirm this issue, I did an eBPF trace
of `bus_for_each_dev()`, `complete_rpm()`, and `complete()` while
unplugging in a variety of situations and found that an unplug from
domain 0 tries to `complete_rpm()` domain 1's switch, whose RPM
completion is not initialized and thus is holding a null wait-list
pointer, triggering the page fault.
Here are the key sections of that eBPF trace. Note that HEAD denotes the
completion's own wait-list HEAD:
```
RESCAN_ENTER domain=0
COMPLETE rescan_domain=0 target=0-1 target_domain=0
route=0x1 parent=0-0 unplugged=1
COMPLETION done=0 head=HEAD next=HEAD prev=HEAD
BUS_WALK domain=0 start=0-1 callback=complete_rpm
CALLBACK_ENTER rescan_domain=0 dev=1-0 parent=domain1 is_switch=1
COMPLETE rescan_domain=0 target=1-0 target_domain=1
route=0x0 parent=domain1 unplugged=0
COMPLETION done=0 head=HEAD next=0 prev=0
complete+5
complete_rpm+43
bus_for_each_dev+133
icm_free_unplugged_children+250
icm_rescan_work+42
```
To fix this, I have reused some of the adjacent logic to recursively
walk and `complete()` only the unplugged switch and its descendants.
I only have a single system with multiple Thunderbolt domains - the Dell
XPS9720. I am consistently able to reproduce the Oops on that system.
Since running with this patch, I have not seen the Oops reoccur. I have
also tested it on a Thinkpad X1-Gen12, and that system boots and runs
well with it, but it only has a single Thunderbolt domain, so it does
not exercise the multi-domain failure case.
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Gopel <jgopel@gmail.com>
---
drivers/thunderbolt/icm.c | 16 +++++++++-------
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/thunderbolt/icm.c b/drivers/thunderbolt/icm.c
index 669807f0eaf8..d6801d8b669b 100644
--- a/drivers/thunderbolt/icm.c
+++ b/drivers/thunderbolt/icm.c
@@ -2068,13 +2068,16 @@ static void icm_unplug_children(struct tb_switch *sw)
}
}
-static int complete_rpm(struct device *dev, void *data)
+static void complete_rpm(struct tb_switch *sw)
{
- struct tb_switch *sw = tb_to_switch(dev);
+ struct tb_port *port;
- if (sw)
- complete(&sw->rpm_complete);
- return 0;
+ complete(&sw->rpm_complete);
+
+ tb_switch_for_each_port(sw, port) {
+ if (tb_port_has_remote(port))
+ complete_rpm(port->remote->sw);
+ }
}
static void remove_unplugged_switch(struct tb_switch *sw)
@@ -2088,8 +2091,7 @@ static void remove_unplugged_switch(struct tb_switch *sw)
* tb_switch_remove() calls pm_runtime_get_sync() that then waits
* for it.
*/
- complete_rpm(&sw->dev, NULL);
- bus_for_each_dev(&tb_bus_type, &sw->dev, NULL, complete_rpm);
+ complete_rpm(sw);
tb_switch_remove(sw);
pm_runtime_mark_last_busy(parent);
--
2.55.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] thunderbolt: Do not RPM complete unrelated subtrees on unplug
2026-10-04 2:26 [PATCH] thunderbolt: Do not RPM complete unrelated subtrees on unplug Jonathan Gopel
@ 2026-10-04 12:02 ` Mika Westerberg
2026-10-04 17:11 ` Jonathan Gopel
2026-10-04 17:13 ` [PATCH v2] " Jonathan Gopel
0 siblings, 2 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Mika Westerberg @ 2026-10-04 12:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jonathan Gopel
Cc: andreas.noever, westeri, YehezkelShB, linux-usb, linux-kernel
Hi,
On Sat, Oct 03, 2026 at 08:26:04PM -0600, Jonathan Gopel wrote:
> When a Thunderbolt device is unplugged, that switch and every switch
> subsequent to it on the bus device list is `complete()`d, not just its
> child devices. In the case of multiple domains, it may cause, eg, an
> attempt to `complete()` the uninitialized domain 1 root switch RPM
> completion on unplug of a switch from domain 0 (though ordering is not
> guaranteed numerically sorted).
Good catch!
> I initially noticed this issue on a Dell XPS9720 when the system would
> seem to sporadically not wake after unplugging a Thunderbolt dock. I
> tried multiple kernel versions including v7.2.7 and v7.3-rc4 to see if
> that resolved the issue, but the issue persisted. Eventually I found
> that I could consistently generate a kernel Oops reporting a page fault
> at 0xffff_ffff_ffff_fff8 on unplug from one side of the laptop and went
> bug hunting. I became suspicious of the `bus_for_each_dev()` walk that I
> ultimately ended up changing. To confirm this issue, I did an eBPF trace
> of `bus_for_each_dev()`, `complete_rpm()`, and `complete()` while
> unplugging in a variety of situations and found that an unplug from
> domain 0 tries to `complete_rpm()` domain 1's switch, whose RPM
> completion is not initialized and thus is holding a null wait-list
> pointer, triggering the page fault.
>
> Here are the key sections of that eBPF trace. Note that HEAD denotes the
> completion's own wait-list HEAD:
>
> ```
> RESCAN_ENTER domain=0
>
> COMPLETE rescan_domain=0 target=0-1 target_domain=0
> route=0x1 parent=0-0 unplugged=1
> COMPLETION done=0 head=HEAD next=HEAD prev=HEAD
>
> BUS_WALK domain=0 start=0-1 callback=complete_rpm
> CALLBACK_ENTER rescan_domain=0 dev=1-0 parent=domain1 is_switch=1
>
> COMPLETE rescan_domain=0 target=1-0 target_domain=1
> route=0x0 parent=domain1 unplugged=0
> COMPLETION done=0 head=HEAD next=0 prev=0
>
> complete+5
> complete_rpm+43
> bus_for_each_dev+133
> icm_free_unplugged_children+250
> icm_rescan_work+42
> ```
>
> To fix this, I have reused some of the adjacent logic to recursively
> walk and `complete()` only the unplugged switch and its descendants.
>
> I only have a single system with multiple Thunderbolt domains - the Dell
> XPS9720. I am consistently able to reproduce the Oops on that system.
> Since running with this patch, I have not seen the Oops reoccur. I have
> also tested it on a Thinkpad X1-Gen12, and that system boots and runs
> well with it, but it only has a single Thunderbolt domain, so it does
> not exercise the multi-domain failure case.
This looks like LLM was involved and if that's the case then please add
Assisted-by: LLM.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Gopel <jgopel@gmail.com>
> ---
> drivers/thunderbolt/icm.c | 16 +++++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/thunderbolt/icm.c b/drivers/thunderbolt/icm.c
> index 669807f0eaf8..d6801d8b669b 100644
> --- a/drivers/thunderbolt/icm.c
> +++ b/drivers/thunderbolt/icm.c
> @@ -2068,13 +2068,16 @@ static void icm_unplug_children(struct tb_switch *sw)
> }
> }
>
> -static int complete_rpm(struct device *dev, void *data)
> +static void complete_rpm(struct tb_switch *sw)
> {
> - struct tb_switch *sw = tb_to_switch(dev);
> + struct tb_port *port;
So instead of this, just check that sw->tb matches what you pass in..
>
> - if (sw)
> - complete(&sw->rpm_complete);
> - return 0;
> + complete(&sw->rpm_complete);
> +
> + tb_switch_for_each_port(sw, port) {
> + if (tb_port_has_remote(port))
> + complete_rpm(port->remote->sw);
> + }
> }
>
> static void remove_unplugged_switch(struct tb_switch *sw)
> @@ -2088,8 +2091,7 @@ static void remove_unplugged_switch(struct tb_switch *sw)
> * tb_switch_remove() calls pm_runtime_get_sync() that then waits
> * for it.
> */
> - complete_rpm(&sw->dev, NULL);
> - bus_for_each_dev(&tb_bus_type, &sw->dev, NULL, complete_rpm);
.. here pass sw->tb
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] thunderbolt: Do not RPM complete unrelated subtrees on unplug
2026-10-04 12:02 ` Mika Westerberg
@ 2026-10-04 17:11 ` Jonathan Gopel
2026-10-04 17:13 ` [PATCH v2] " Jonathan Gopel
1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Jonathan Gopel @ 2026-10-04 17:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mika Westerberg
Cc: andreas.noever, westeri, YehezkelShB, linux-usb, linux-kernel
Hi Mika,
Thank you for the prompt response, it's much appreciated. I've left a
few questions inline.
On Sun, Oct 04, 2026 at 02:02:55PM +0200, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, Oct 03, 2026 at 08:26:04PM -0600, Jonathan Gopel wrote:
> > When a Thunderbolt device is unplugged, that switch and every switch
> > subsequent to it on the bus device list is `complete()`d, not just its
> > child devices. In the case of multiple domains, it may cause, eg, an
> > attempt to `complete()` the uninitialized domain 1 root switch RPM
> > completion on unplug of a switch from domain 0 (though ordering is not
> > guaranteed numerically sorted).
>
> Good catch!
>
> > I initially noticed this issue on a Dell XPS9720 when the system would
> > seem to sporadically not wake after unplugging a Thunderbolt dock. I
> > tried multiple kernel versions including v7.2.7 and v7.3-rc4 to see if
> > that resolved the issue, but the issue persisted. Eventually I found
> > that I could consistently generate a kernel Oops reporting a page fault
> > at 0xffff_ffff_ffff_fff8 on unplug from one side of the laptop and went
> > bug hunting. I became suspicious of the `bus_for_each_dev()` walk that I
> > ultimately ended up changing. To confirm this issue, I did an eBPF trace
> > of `bus_for_each_dev()`, `complete_rpm()`, and `complete()` while
> > unplugging in a variety of situations and found that an unplug from
> > domain 0 tries to `complete_rpm()` domain 1's switch, whose RPM
> > completion is not initialized and thus is holding a null wait-list
> > pointer, triggering the page fault.
> >
> > Here are the key sections of that eBPF trace. Note that HEAD denotes the
> > completion's own wait-list HEAD:
> >
> > ```
> > RESCAN_ENTER domain=0
> >
> > COMPLETE rescan_domain=0 target=0-1 target_domain=0
> > route=0x1 parent=0-0 unplugged=1
> > COMPLETION done=0 head=HEAD next=HEAD prev=HEAD
> >
> > BUS_WALK domain=0 start=0-1 callback=complete_rpm
> > CALLBACK_ENTER rescan_domain=0 dev=1-0 parent=domain1 is_switch=1
> >
> > COMPLETE rescan_domain=0 target=1-0 target_domain=1
> > route=0x0 parent=domain1 unplugged=0
> > COMPLETION done=0 head=HEAD next=0 prev=0
> >
> > complete+5
> > complete_rpm+43
> > bus_for_each_dev+133
> > icm_free_unplugged_children+250
> > icm_rescan_work+42
> > ```
> >
> > To fix this, I have reused some of the adjacent logic to recursively
> > walk and `complete()` only the unplugged switch and its descendants.
> >
> > I only have a single system with multiple Thunderbolt domains - the Dell
> > XPS9720. I am consistently able to reproduce the Oops on that system.
> > Since running with this patch, I have not seen the Oops reoccur. I have
> > also tested it on a Thinkpad X1-Gen12, and that system boots and runs
> > well with it, but it only has a single Thunderbolt domain, so it does
> > not exercise the multi-domain failure case.
>
> This looks like LLM was involved and if that's the case then please add
> Assisted-by: LLM.
>
I'm happy to add an annotation here, but I was unclear on what the
policy was. I have a few other issues with this system since adding a
TB5 dock to my setup that I may also pursue patching, so if it's ok with
you I'd love to understand the expectation a bit better be expected.
I've read the policy, but I didn't come away with a clear understanding
of what exactly counts as assistance.
I had an LLM do the initial portion of the investigation here, basically
going from symptoms to identifying the Oops, which pointed at the
Thunderbolt unplug code. From there, I wanted to make sure I delivered a
high quality fix, so I did the remainder by hand. Does this warrant the
annotation?
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jonathan Gopel <jgopel@gmail.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/thunderbolt/icm.c | 16 +++++++++-------
> > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/thunderbolt/icm.c b/drivers/thunderbolt/icm.c
> > index 669807f0eaf8..d6801d8b669b 100644
> > --- a/drivers/thunderbolt/icm.c
> > +++ b/drivers/thunderbolt/icm.c
> > @@ -2068,13 +2068,16 @@ static void icm_unplug_children(struct tb_switch *sw)
> > }
> > }
> >
> > -static int complete_rpm(struct device *dev, void *data)
> > +static void complete_rpm(struct tb_switch *sw)
> > {
> > - struct tb_switch *sw = tb_to_switch(dev);
> > + struct tb_port *port;}
>
> So instead of this, just check that sw->tb matches what you pass in..
>
> >
> > - if (sw)
> > - complete(&sw->rpm_complete);
> > - return 0;
> > + complete(&sw->rpm_complete);
> > +
> > + tb_switch_for_each_port(sw, port) {
> > + if (tb_port_has_remote(port))
> > + complete_rpm(port->remote->sw);
> > + }
> > }
> >
> > static void remove_unplugged_switch(struct tb_switch *sw)
> > @@ -2088,8 +2091,7 @@ static void remove_unplugged_switch(struct tb_switch *sw)
> > * tb_switch_remove() calls pm_runtime_get_sync() that then waits
> > * for it.
> > */
> > - complete_rpm(&sw->dev, NULL);
> > - bus_for_each_dev(&tb_bus_type, &sw->dev, NULL, complete_rpm);
>
> .. here pass sw->tb
I'm submitting a v2 patch with this revision. If you have time, I would
love to understand the reasoning for preferring one over the other - to
my eye they look equivalent.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v2] thunderbolt: Do not RPM complete unrelated subtrees on unplug
2026-10-04 12:02 ` Mika Westerberg
2026-10-04 17:11 ` Jonathan Gopel
@ 2026-10-04 17:13 ` Jonathan Gopel
1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Jonathan Gopel @ 2026-10-04 17:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: mika.westerberg
Cc: andreas.noever, westeri, YehezkelShB, linux-usb, linux-kernel,
Jonathan Gopel
When a Thunderbolt device is unplugged, that switch and every switch
subsequent to it on the bus device list is `complete()`d, not just its
child devices. In the case of multiple domains, it may cause, eg, an
attempt to `complete()` the uninitialized domain 1 root switch RPM
completion on unplug of a switch from domain 0 (though ordering is not
guaranteed numerically sorted).
I initially noticed this issue on a Dell XPS9720 when the system would
seem to sporadically not wake after unplugging a Thunderbolt dock. I
tried multiple kernel versions including v7.2.7 and v7.3-rc4 to see if
that resolved the issue, but the issue persisted. Eventually I found
that I could consistently generate a kernel Oops reporting a page fault
at 0xffff_ffff_ffff_fff8 on unplug from one side of the laptop and went
bug hunting. I became suspicious of the `bus_for_each_dev()` walk that I
ultimately ended up changing. To confirm this issue, I did an eBPF trace
of `bus_for_each_dev()`, `complete_rpm()`, and `complete()` while
unplugging in a variety of situations and found that an unplug from
domain 0 tries to `complete_rpm()` domain 1's switch, whose RPM
completion is not initialized and thus is holding a null wait-list
pointer, triggering the page fault.
Here are the key sections of that eBPF trace. Note that HEAD denotes the
completion's own wait-list HEAD:
```
RESCAN_ENTER domain=0
COMPLETE rescan_domain=0 target=0-1 target_domain=0
route=0x1 parent=0-0 unplugged=1
COMPLETION done=0 head=HEAD next=HEAD prev=HEAD
BUS_WALK domain=0 start=0-1 callback=complete_rpm
CALLBACK_ENTER rescan_domain=0 dev=1-0 parent=domain1 is_switch=1
COMPLETE rescan_domain=0 target=1-0 target_domain=1
route=0x0 parent=domain1 unplugged=0
COMPLETION done=0 head=HEAD next=0 prev=0
complete+5
complete_rpm+43
bus_for_each_dev+133
icm_free_unplugged_children+250
icm_rescan_work+42
```
This patch gates the `complete()` on an additional condition - that the
Thunderbolt domain matches the domain of the device that was unplugged.
I only have a single system with multiple Thunderbolt domains - the Dell
XPS9720. I am consistently able to reproduce the Oops on that system.
Since running with this patch, I have not seen the Oops reoccur. I have
also tested it on a Thinkpad X1-Gen12, and that system boots and runs
well with it, but it only has a single Thunderbolt domain, so it does
not exercise the multi-domain failure case.
Assisted by: LLM
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Gopel <jgopel@gmail.com>
---
drivers/thunderbolt/icm.c | 8 ++++----
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/thunderbolt/icm.c b/drivers/thunderbolt/icm.c
index 669807f0eaf8..c1e6b2ea63cb 100644
--- a/drivers/thunderbolt/icm.c
+++ b/drivers/thunderbolt/icm.c
@@ -2071,9 +2071,9 @@ static void icm_unplug_children(struct tb_switch *sw)
static int complete_rpm(struct device *dev, void *data)
{
struct tb_switch *sw = tb_to_switch(dev);
-
- if (sw)
+ if (sw && sw->tb == (struct tb *)data) {
complete(&sw->rpm_complete);
+ }
return 0;
}
@@ -2088,8 +2088,8 @@ static void remove_unplugged_switch(struct tb_switch *sw)
* tb_switch_remove() calls pm_runtime_get_sync() that then waits
* for it.
*/
- complete_rpm(&sw->dev, NULL);
- bus_for_each_dev(&tb_bus_type, &sw->dev, NULL, complete_rpm);
+ complete_rpm(&sw->dev, sw->tb);
+ bus_for_each_dev(&tb_bus_type, &sw->dev, sw->tb, complete_rpm);
tb_switch_remove(sw);
pm_runtime_mark_last_busy(parent);
--
2.55.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2026-10-04 17:14 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2026-10-04 2:26 [PATCH] thunderbolt: Do not RPM complete unrelated subtrees on unplug Jonathan Gopel
2026-10-04 12:02 ` Mika Westerberg
2026-10-04 17:11 ` Jonathan Gopel
2026-10-04 17:13 ` [PATCH v2] " Jonathan Gopel
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®