From: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@oss.qualcomm.com>
To: Maulik Shah <maulik.shah@oss.qualcomm.com>,
Bjorn Andersson <andersson@kernel.org>,
Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@kernel.org>,
Abel Vesa <abelvesa@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"Raju P.L.S.S.S.N" <quic_rplsssn@quicinc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/3] soc: qcom: rpmh-rsc: Output debug information from RSC
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2026 13:16:31 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <778a3d18-48d1-4d58-acca-041e9545f38b@oss.qualcomm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261005-rpmh-timeout-debug-v1-v5-3-7b9c457a191c@oss.qualcomm.com>
On 10/5/26 11:11 AM, Maulik Shah wrote:
> From: "Raju P.L.S.S.S.N" <rplsssn@codeaurora.org>
>
> When an RPMh transfer times out there is no visibility into which
> TCS was stuck, what commands it was carrying, or whether the
> completion IRQ was pending at the GIC. Add rpmh_rsc_debug() to
> capture this state at timeout:
>
> - Iterates all in-use TCSes and dumps per-TCS control register
> state (controller status, AMC mode, IRQ status) and per-command
> register state (address, data, message ID, completion status).
> The accelerator type (ARC/VRM/BCM) is decoded from the address
> using cmd_db_hw_type_str().
I believe all of these are valid concerns from an LLM (4 maybe
less verbatim but the point stands):
1. The diagnosis logic is wrong in several cases.
else if ((busy && !gic_irq_sts) || !aoss_irq_sts) -> "AOSS did not respond"
else if (gic_irq_sts) -> "IRQ pending at GIC but not handled"
- If the IRQ is pending at the GIC but aoss_irq_sts is false, it blames AOSS instead of reporting the pending IRQ.
- If busy == 0, for example because the handler reclaimed the TCS just after the timeout, aoss_irq_sts stays false. It then blames AOSS with nothing to base that on.
- If the RSC IRQ status is DONE but the GIC shows NOT PENDING, no message is printed.
- A clearer order is:
- GIC pending: handler delayed or Linux lockup.
- Otherwise, RSC IRQ status not set: AOSS didn't respond.
- Otherwise: IRQ asserted in the RSC but not seen at the GIC.
2. Unlocked access to other TCSes' requests.
- rpmh_rsc_debug() walks tcs_in_use and get_req_from_tcs() with no drv->lock.
- req->state and req->wait_for_compl are then dereferenced.
- The request for another TCS lives on some other caller's stack, such as DEFINE_RPMH_MSG_ONSTACK. If tcs_tx_done() completes it while we dump, that is a possible use-after-return.
- Taking the lock with spin_trylock_irqsave() would avoid blocking in a lockup scenario. Alternatively, snapshot only the registers and don't dereference req.
3. The cover letter example contradicts itself.
- It shows irq-sts:WAITING, a command with +resp-received, "Completion is done", and then "Accelerator(s) at AOSS did not respond".
- "Completion is done" at timeout means we raced with completion. A command that already received a response contradicts the AOSS message.
- This looks like the real consequence of issue 1.
4. Uninitialized gic_irq_sts. It's only read when ret == 0, so it's safe today. Initialize it anyway to avoid -Wmaybe-uninitialized noise.
5. Early return when irq_get_irq_data() returns NULL. The completion state is then never printed, even though it's useful on its own.
6. TCS dump when req == NULL. print_tcs_info() jumps to print_tcs_data and prints CMD= lines with no TCS= header, so you can't tell which TCS they belong to. Print a header in that case too.
8. Include order. <linux/irq.h> is inserted between interrupt.h and io.h. It should come after iopoll.h.
9. drv->irq assignment. It's set after devm_request_irq(). That works because clients are populated later, but setting it before requesting the IRQ is more robust.
Konrad
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-13 11:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-05 9:11 [PATCH v5 0/3] " Maulik Shah
2026-10-05 9:11 ` [PATCH v5 1/3] soc: qcom: cmd-db: export RPMh accelerator type string helper Maulik Shah
2026-10-05 9:11 ` [PATCH v5 2/3] soc: qcom: cmd-db: add reverse address-to-name lookup Maulik Shah
2026-10-05 9:11 ` [PATCH v5 3/3] soc: qcom: rpmh-rsc: Output debug information from RSC Maulik Shah
2026-10-13 11:16 ` Konrad Dybcio [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=778a3d18-48d1-4d58-acca-041e9545f38b@oss.qualcomm.com \
--to=konrad.dybcio@oss.qualcomm.com \
--cc=abelvesa@kernel.org \
--cc=andersson@kernel.org \
--cc=konradybcio@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maulik.shah@oss.qualcomm.com \
--cc=quic_rplsssn@quicinc.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®