From: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>
To: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>, hejunhao3@huawei.com
Cc: coresight@lists.linaro.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
jonathan.cameron@huawei.com, mike.leach@linaro.org,
linuxarm@huawei.com, yangyicong@huawei.com,
prime.zeng@hisilicon.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] coresight: trbe: Fix TRBE potential sleep in atomic context
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2023 12:43:55 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <80ef7a87-6adf-27bc-43ae-05ae5680e418@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230816141008.535450-1-suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
Hello Junhao,
On 8/16/23 19:40, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> From: Junhao He <hejunhao3@huawei.com>
>
> smp_call_function_single() will allocate an IPI interrupt vector to
> the target processor and send a function call request to the interrupt
> vector. After the target processor receives the IPI interrupt, it will
> execute arm_trbe_remove_coresight_cpu() call request in the interrupt
> handler.
>
> According to the device_unregister() stack information, if other process
> is useing the device, the down_write() may sleep, and trigger deadlocks
> or unexpected errors.
>
> arm_trbe_remove_coresight_cpu
> coresight_unregister
> device_unregister
> device_del
> kobject_del
> __kobject_del
> sysfs_remove_dir
> kernfs_remove
> down_write ---------> it may sleep
But how did you really detect this problem ? Does this show up as an warning when
you enable lockdep debug ? OR it really happened during a real workload execution
followed by TRBE module unload. Although the problem seems plausible (which needs
fixing), just wondering how did we trigger this.
>
> Add a helper arm_trbe_disable_cpu() to disable TRBE precpu irq and reset
> per TRBE.
> Simply call arm_trbe_remove_coresight_cpu() directly without useing the
> smp_call_function_single(), which is the same as registering the TRBE
> coresight device.
>
> Fixes: 3fbf7f011f24 ("coresight: sink: Add TRBE driver")
> Signed-off-by: Junhao He <hejunhao3@huawei.com>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230814093813.19152-2-hejunhao3@huawei.com
> [ Remove duplicate cpumask checks during removal ]
> Signed-off-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
> ---
> drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-trbe.c | 33 +++++++++++---------
> 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-trbe.c b/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-trbe.c
> index 7720619909d6..025f70adee47 100644
> --- a/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-trbe.c
> +++ b/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-trbe.c
> @@ -1225,6 +1225,17 @@ static void arm_trbe_enable_cpu(void *info)
> enable_percpu_irq(drvdata->irq, IRQ_TYPE_NONE);
> }
>
> +static void arm_trbe_disable_cpu(void *info)
> +{
> + struct trbe_drvdata *drvdata = info;
> + struct trbe_cpudata *cpudata = this_cpu_ptr(drvdata->cpudata);
> +
> + disable_percpu_irq(drvdata->irq);
> + trbe_reset_local(cpudata);
> + cpudata->drvdata = NULL;
> +}
> +
> +
> static void arm_trbe_register_coresight_cpu(struct trbe_drvdata *drvdata, int cpu)
> {
> struct trbe_cpudata *cpudata = per_cpu_ptr(drvdata->cpudata, cpu);
> @@ -1326,18 +1337,12 @@ static void arm_trbe_probe_cpu(void *info)
> cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, &drvdata->supported_cpus);
> }
>
> -static void arm_trbe_remove_coresight_cpu(void *info)
> +static void arm_trbe_remove_coresight_cpu(struct trbe_drvdata *drvdata, int cpu)
> {
> - int cpu = smp_processor_id();
> - struct trbe_drvdata *drvdata = info;
> - struct trbe_cpudata *cpudata = per_cpu_ptr(drvdata->cpudata, cpu);
> struct coresight_device *trbe_csdev = coresight_get_percpu_sink(cpu);
>
> - disable_percpu_irq(drvdata->irq);
> - trbe_reset_local(cpudata);
> if (trbe_csdev) {
> coresight_unregister(trbe_csdev);
> - cpudata->drvdata = NULL;
> coresight_set_percpu_sink(cpu, NULL);
> }
> }
> @@ -1366,8 +1371,10 @@ static int arm_trbe_remove_coresight(struct trbe_drvdata *drvdata)
> {
> int cpu;
>
> - for_each_cpu(cpu, &drvdata->supported_cpus)
> - smp_call_function_single(cpu, arm_trbe_remove_coresight_cpu, drvdata, 1);
> + for_each_cpu(cpu, &drvdata->supported_cpus) {
> + smp_call_function_single(cpu, arm_trbe_disable_cpu, drvdata, 1);
> + arm_trbe_remove_coresight_cpu(drvdata, cpu);
> + }
> free_percpu(drvdata->cpudata);
> return 0;
> }
> @@ -1406,12 +1413,8 @@ static int arm_trbe_cpu_teardown(unsigned int cpu, struct hlist_node *node)
> {
> struct trbe_drvdata *drvdata = hlist_entry_safe(node, struct trbe_drvdata, hotplug_node);
>
> - if (cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, &drvdata->supported_cpus)) {
> - struct trbe_cpudata *cpudata = per_cpu_ptr(drvdata->cpudata, cpu);
> -
> - disable_percpu_irq(drvdata->irq);
> - trbe_reset_local(cpudata);
> - }
> + if (cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, &drvdata->supported_cpus))
> + arm_trbe_disable_cpu(drvdata);
This code hunk seems unrelated to the context here other than just finding another use case
for arm_trbe_disable_cpu(). The problem is - arm_trbe_disable_cpu() resets cpudata->drvdata
which might not get re-initialized back in arm_trbe_cpu_startup(), as there will still be a
per cpu sink associated as confirmed with coresight_get_percpu_sink(). I guess it might be
better to drop this change and just keep everything limited to SMP IPI callback reworking in
arm_trbe_remove_coresight().
> return 0;
> }
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-08-17 7:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-08-14 9:38 [PATCH 0/2] Fix some issues with TRBE building as a module Junhao He
2023-08-14 9:38 ` [PATCH 1/2] coresight: trbe: Fix TRBE potential sleep in atomic context Junhao He
2023-08-14 10:34 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2023-08-14 13:32 ` hejunhao
2023-08-14 22:57 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2023-08-15 11:40 ` hejunhao
2023-08-14 9:38 ` [PATCH 2/2] coresight: core: Fix multiple free TRBE platform data resource Junhao He
2023-08-14 22:47 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2023-08-15 11:38 ` hejunhao
2023-08-16 13:13 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2023-08-16 13:58 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2023-08-16 14:10 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] coresight: trbe: Fix TRBE potential sleep in atomic context Suzuki K Poulose
2023-08-16 14:10 ` [PATCH 2/2] coresight: trbe: Allocate platform data per device Suzuki K Poulose
2023-08-17 6:37 ` Anshuman Khandual
2023-08-17 9:24 ` James Clark
2023-08-17 10:01 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2023-08-17 10:16 ` Anshuman Khandual
2023-08-17 10:33 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2023-08-17 10:01 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2023-08-17 8:47 ` hejunhao
2023-08-17 7:13 ` Anshuman Khandual [this message]
2023-08-17 8:41 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] coresight: trbe: Fix TRBE potential sleep in atomic context hejunhao
2023-08-17 9:57 ` James Clark
2023-08-17 9:59 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2023-08-17 6:18 ` [PATCH 0/2] Fix some issues with TRBE building as a module Anshuman Khandual
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=80ef7a87-6adf-27bc-43ae-05ae5680e418@arm.com \
--to=anshuman.khandual@arm.com \
--cc=coresight@lists.linaro.org \
--cc=hejunhao3@huawei.com \
--cc=jonathan.cameron@huawei.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxarm@huawei.com \
--cc=mike.leach@linaro.org \
--cc=prime.zeng@hisilicon.com \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=yangyicong@huawei.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®