From: Adrian Ambrozewicz <aambrozewicz@nvidia.com>
To: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@kernel.org>, Linus Walleij <linusw@kernel.org>
Cc: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@oss.qualcomm.com>,
Kent Gibson <warthog618@gmail.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
Herve Codina <herve.codina@bootlin.com>,
Jia Jia <physicalmtea@gmail.com>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 1/6] gpiolib: wait for pending label frees before cleaning up desc_srcu
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2026 12:23:33 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20261016-gpiolib-chip-removal-v2-1-aambrozewicz@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261016-gpiolib-chip-removal-v2-0-aambrozewicz@nvidia.com>
desc_set_label() frees the old label with call_srcu() on gdev->desc_srcu.
gpiodev_release() calls synchronize_srcu() and then cleanup_srcu_struct()
on it, meaning to run the pending frees first, but synchronize_srcu()
only waits for a grace period, not for callbacks queued before it to be
invoked. Once the srcu_struct uses per-CPU callback lists, a label freed
on one CPU, for instance by gpiochip_free_hogs() at the start of
gpiochip_remove(), can still be waiting for its invocation timer there
when synchronize_srcu() returns on another, and cleanup_srcu_struct()
warns:
WARNING: kernel/rcu/srcutree.c:706 at cleanup_srcu_struct
Call Trace:
gpiodev_release
device_release
kobject_put
devres_release_all
device_release_driver_internal
platform_device_unregister
gpio_sim_device_deactivate
cleanup_srcu_struct() then flushes the callbacks itself, so the label is
still freed, but the warning is what the comment above that check says
srcu_barrier() is for. Use it.
A gpio-sim chip with one hogged line, set live and back in a loop, warns
within 4 to 60 cycles in three runs on a 4-CPU guest booted with
srcutree.convert_to_big=1; with this change, three runs of 1000 cycles
pass. With the default srcutree parameters the srcu_struct only goes
per-CPU under contention and the loop did not hit it in 3000 cycles; the
warning was first seen that way, once, on a KCSAN arm64 guest unbinding
a USB-attached GPIO controller whose firmware node hogs a line, and
since then on real hardware with v7.3-rc5 arm64 KCSAN kernels, when
unbinding a USB GPIO expander whose driver is not yet upstream, built
both as an out-of-tree module and into the kernel.
Fixes: a86d27693066 ("gpiolib: fix the speed of descriptor label setting with SRCU")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Reviewed-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
Assisted-by: LLM
Signed-off-by: Adrian Ambrozewicz <aambrozewicz@nvidia.com>
---
Changes in v2:
- Backtrace cut down to the warning and the frames that matter (Andy).
- Paul's Reviewed-by.
- Assisted-by tag.
drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
index 772c6f04f489..1984f3416437 100644
--- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
+++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
@@ -895,7 +895,7 @@ static void gpiodev_release(struct device *dev)
struct gpio_device *gdev = to_gpio_device(dev);
/* Call pending kfree()s for descriptor labels. */
- synchronize_srcu(&gdev->desc_srcu);
+ srcu_barrier(&gdev->desc_srcu);
cleanup_srcu_struct(&gdev->desc_srcu);
ida_free(&gpio_ida, gdev->id);
--
2.43.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-16 9:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-16 9:23 [PATCH v2 0/6] gpiolib: fix chip removal with lines still requested from user space Adrian Ambrozewicz
2026-10-16 9:23 ` Adrian Ambrozewicz [this message]
2026-10-16 9:23 ` [PATCH v2 2/6] gpiolib: free the label of lines released after their chip was removed Adrian Ambrozewicz
2026-10-16 13:38 ` Andy Shevchenko
2026-10-20 12:59 ` Adrian Ambrozewicz
2026-10-21 6:48 ` Andy Shevchenko
2026-10-16 9:23 ` [PATCH v2 3/6] gpiolib: cdev: do not free line IRQs again after the chip is removed Adrian Ambrozewicz
2026-10-16 9:23 ` [PATCH v2 4/6] gpiolib: cdev: don't sleep in the SRCU read section in read() Adrian Ambrozewicz
2026-10-16 9:23 ` [PATCH v2 5/6] gpiolib: cdev: don't leak the IRQ name when the chip is removed Adrian Ambrozewicz
2026-10-16 13:41 ` Andy Shevchenko
2026-10-20 12:59 ` Adrian Ambrozewicz
2026-10-21 6:50 ` Andy Shevchenko
2026-10-21 9:55 ` Adrian Ambrozewicz
2026-10-16 9:23 ` [PATCH v2 6/6] gpiolib: let the character device free its IRQs first on chip removal Adrian Ambrozewicz
2026-10-16 13:40 ` Kent Gibson
2026-10-19 8:40 ` Andy Shevchenko
2026-10-19 9:00 ` Kent Gibson
2026-10-20 12:59 ` Adrian Ambrozewicz
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=20261016-gpiolib-chip-removal-v2-1-aambrozewicz@nvidia.com \
--to=aambrozewicz@nvidia.com \
--cc=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
--cc=bartosz.golaszewski@oss.qualcomm.com \
--cc=brgl@kernel.org \
--cc=herve.codina@bootlin.com \
--cc=linusw@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=physicalmtea@gmail.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=warthog618@gmail.com \
/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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®