mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrzej Pietrasiewicz <andrzej.p@samsung.com>
To: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>,
	Wei.Yang@windriver.com, Michal Nazarewicz <mina86@mina86.com>
Cc: Felipe Balbi <balbi@ti.com>,
	gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, USB list <linux-usb@vger.kernel.org>,
	Kernel development list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] USB:gadget: Fix a warning while loading g_mass_storage
Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2014 14:06:21 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <538F0BBD.2000605@samsung.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.1406031033010.1054-100000@iolanthe.rowland.org>

Hi Alan,

W dniu 03.06.2014 16:48, Alan Stern pisze:
> On Tue, 3 Jun 2014 Wei.Yang@windriver.com wrote:
>
>> From: Yang Wei <Wei.Yang@windriver.com>
>>
>> While loading g_mass_storage module, the following warning is triggered.
>> In fact, it is more easy to reproduce it with RT kernel.
>>
>> WARNING: at drivers/usb/gadget/composite.c:
>> usb_composite_setup_continue: Unexpected call
>> Modules linked in: fat vfat minix nls_cp437 nls_iso8859_1 g_mass_storage
>> [<800179cc>] (unwind_backtrace+0x0/0x104) from [<80619608>] (dump_stack+0x20/0x24)
>> [<80619608>] (dump_stack+0x20/0x24) from [<80025100>] (warn_slowpath_common+0x64/0x74)
>> [<80025100>] (warn_slowpath_common+0x64/0x74) from [<800251cc>] (warn_slowpath_fmt+0x40/0x48)
>> [<800251cc>] (warn_slowpath_fmt+0x40/0x48) from [<7f047774>] (usb_composite_setup_continue+0xb4/0xbc [g_mass_storage])
>> [<7f047774>] (usb_composite_setup_continue+0xb4/0xbc [g_mass_storage]) from [<7f047ad4>] (handle_exception+0x358/0x3e4 [g_mass_storage])
>> [<7f047ad4>] (handle_exception+0x358/0x3e4 [g_mass_storage]) from [<7f048080>] (fsg_main_thread+0x520/0x157c [g_mass_storage])
>> [<7f048080>] (fsg_main_thread+0x520/0x157c [g_mass_storage]) from [<8004bc90>] (kthread+0x98/0x9c)
>> [<8004bc90>] (kthread+0x98/0x9c) from [<8000faec>] (kernel_thread_exit+0x0/0x8)
>>
>> The root cause just likes the following scenario.
>>
>> irq thread
>>
>> composite_disconnect()
>> |
>> |->fsg_disable() fsg->common->new_fsg = NULL
>>                   and then wake fsg_main_thread
>>                   with seting common->state to
>>                   FSG_STATE_CONFIG_CHANGE.
>>                                                      fsg_main_thread
>>                                                      |
>>                                                      |->do_set_interface()
>> irq thread
>>
>> set_config()
>> |
>> |->fsg_set_alt() fsg->common->new_fsg = new_fsg
>>                   and then also wake up fsg_main_thread
>>                   with setting common->state to
>>                   FSG_STATE_CONFIG_CHANGE.
>>                                                      |-> if(common->new_fsg)
>> 		                                                 usb_composite_setup_continue()
>>
>> In this case, fsg_main_thread would invoke usb_composite_setup_continue
>> twice, so the second call would trigger the above call trace, as we also
>> save common->new_fsg while changing the common->state.
>
> Michal and Andrzej:
>
> I haven't paid much attention to these matters, because you handled the
> conversion from g_file_storage to f_mass_storage using the composite
> framework.  But this patch seemed odd, so I took a closer look.

Actually when I started dealing with usb gadgets the f_mass_storage
had already been there. My involvement started with some cleanup,
then moving to the new function registration interface
(usb_get/put_function_instance(), usb_get/put_function())
and adding configfs support. That said, it is not impossible for me
to have spoilt something :O

>
> In f_mass_storage.c, struct fsg_common is shared among all the function
> instances.  This structure includes things like cmnd and nluns, which
> will in general be different for different functions.
>
> That's okay if each function is in a separate config, but what happens
> when there are multiple functions in the same config, using different
> interfaces?  What if the host sends concurrent commands to two of these
> functions?
>


When Sebastian introduced the function registration interface I didn't
specially like the naming: struct usb_function_instance is something
different than an instance of struct usb_function.

The purpose of fsg_alloc_inst() is to create a usb_function_instance
whose container_of is struct fsg_opts. In fact it is struct fsg_opts
which is actually allocated; one of its members is struct fsg_common
which is also allocated - individually for each struct usb_function_instance.

Among traditional gadgets there is no gadget which uses mass storage function
more than once. On the other hand, when gadgets are created with configfs
it is forbidden to link a given function more than once into a given
config, that is a struct usb_function_instance can be referenced by more
than one config, but can be referenced only once in a given config;
each symbolic link corresponds to an instance of struct usb_function
(don't confuse with struct usb_function_instance).
So yes, an fsg_common can be shared among instances of struct usb_function,
but neither with traditional gadgets as they are now nor with configfs
is it possible to have the same fsg_common referenced more than once
in a given config.

AP


  parent reply	other threads:[~2014-06-04 12:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-06-03  9:37 Wei.Yang
2014-06-03 14:48 ` Alan Stern
2014-06-04  1:20   ` Yang,Wei
2014-06-04  1:45     ` Peter Chen
2014-06-04  3:16       ` Yang,Wei
2014-06-04  4:41         ` Peter Chen
2014-06-04 13:56         ` Alan Stern
2014-06-04 18:48           ` Paul Zimmerman
2014-06-05  1:30           ` Peter Chen
2014-06-05 14:21             ` Alan Stern
2014-06-04  2:34     ` Yang,Wei
2014-06-04 12:06   ` Andrzej Pietrasiewicz [this message]
2014-06-04 15:26     ` Alan Stern
2014-06-05 10:00       ` Andrzej Pietrasiewicz
2014-06-05 18:10         ` Alan Stern
2014-06-04  4:32 ` [PATCH v2] " Wei.Yang
2014-06-05 18:08   ` Alan Stern
2014-06-09  6:02     ` Yang,Wei
2014-06-09  6:19   ` [PATCH v3] " Wei.Yang
2014-06-13  6:22     ` Yang,Wei
2014-06-13 13:39       ` Alan Stern
2014-06-14 13:10         ` Yang,Wei
2014-06-13  9:44     ` Michal Nazarewicz
2014-06-13 13:43       ` Alan Stern
2014-06-13 14:57         ` Michal Nazarewicz
2014-06-15  2:40   ` [PATCH] " Wei.Yang
2014-06-15  2:42     ` Yang,Wei
2014-06-17  5:59       ` Yang,Wei
2014-06-17 14:18         ` Alan Stern
2014-06-18  1:08           ` Yang,Wei
2014-06-18 11:44             ` Michal Nazarewicz
2014-06-18 14:22               ` Alan Stern
2014-06-19  1:48               ` Yang,Wei
2014-06-17 18:20     ` Michal Nazarewicz

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=538F0BBD.2000605@samsung.com \
    --to=andrzej.p@samsung.com \
    --cc=Wei.Yang@windriver.com \
    --cc=balbi@ti.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-usb@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mina86@mina86.com \
    --cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
    /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