* Re: aha1542 oops caused by new request_irq routines [not found] <AANLkTilB661W9H9IPxn9TGBvv-omVnAh43r3XR5uM58m@mail.gmail.com> @ 2010-05-31 14:32 ` James Bottomley 2010-05-31 16:43 ` Thomas Gleixner 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: James Bottomley @ 2010-05-31 14:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Tedheadster; +Cc: linux-scsi, linux-kernel, Thomas Gleixner On Mon, 2010-05-31 at 10:03 -0400, Tedheadster wrote: > I'm reliably getting this oops: > > Configuring Adaptec (SCSI-ID 6) at IO:334, IRQ 10, DMA priority 6 > BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at mm/slub.c:1598 > in_atomic(): 0, irqs_disabled(): 1, pid: 4782, name: modprobe > Pid: 4782, comm: modprobe Not tainted 2.6.30.10-105.2.23.RODATA.fc11.i586 #1 > Call Trace: > [<c0469e58>] ? request_threaded_irq+0x85/0x145 > [<c0422ab7>] __might_sleep+0xc4/0xc9 > [<c04a4322>] kmem_cache_alloc_notrace+0x29/0xb0 > [<c0469e58>] request_threaded_irq+0x85/0x145 > [<d086439c>] ? do_aha1542_intr_handle+0x0/0x2be [aha1542] > [<d08696aa>] aha1542_detect+0x631/0x76f [aha1542] > [<d0869841>] init_this_scsi_driver+0x59/0xc7 [aha1542] > [<d08697e8>] ? init_this_scsi_driver+0x0/0xc7 [aha1542] > [<c040114b>] do_one_initcall+0x51/0x13f > [<c0451111>] sys_init_module+0x8b/0x192 > [<c0403535>] syscall_call+0x7/0xb > scsi5 : Adaptec 1542 So this one's a bit tricky. aha1542 uses a global spinlock to give it thread safety and various other things. In this case it's trying to use the lock to hold off the interrupt until everything is set up. Now that we're doing a GFP_KERNEL allocation in the interrupt handler code you can't disable interrupts while calling request_irq since this is an old card liable to spurious interrupts as it gets poked in setup. I think a possible solution is this, since the mere act of installing an interrupt handler shouldn't trigger the problem. However, I thought the pattern of disabling interrupts and setting up the handler and registers was a common one ... is there some way this is supposed to work now that doesn't involve altering the drivers? James --- diff --git a/drivers/scsi/aha1542.c b/drivers/scsi/aha1542.c index 2a8cf13..0852079 100644 --- a/drivers/scsi/aha1542.c +++ b/drivers/scsi/aha1542.c @@ -1190,13 +1190,12 @@ fail: DEB(aha1542_stat()); DEB(printk("aha1542_detect: enable interrupt channel %d\n", irq_level)); - spin_lock_irqsave(&aha1542_lock, flags); if (request_irq(irq_level, do_aha1542_intr_handle, 0, "aha1542", shpnt)) { printk(KERN_ERR "Unable to allocate IRQ for adaptec controller.\n"); - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&aha1542_lock, flags); goto unregister; } + spin_lock_irqsave(&aha1542_lock, flags); if (dma_chan != 0xFF) { if (request_dma(dma_chan, "aha1542")) { printk(KERN_ERR "Unable to allocate DMA channel for Adaptec.\n"); ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: aha1542 oops caused by new request_irq routines 2010-05-31 14:32 ` aha1542 oops caused by new request_irq routines James Bottomley @ 2010-05-31 16:43 ` Thomas Gleixner 2010-05-31 16:59 ` James Bottomley 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2010-05-31 16:43 UTC (permalink / raw) To: James Bottomley; +Cc: Tedheadster, linux-scsi, linux-kernel On Mon, 31 May 2010, James Bottomley wrote: > On Mon, 2010-05-31 at 10:03 -0400, Tedheadster wrote: > > I'm reliably getting this oops: > > > > Configuring Adaptec (SCSI-ID 6) at IO:334, IRQ 10, DMA priority 6 > > BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at mm/slub.c:1598 > > in_atomic(): 0, irqs_disabled(): 1, pid: 4782, name: modprobe > > Pid: 4782, comm: modprobe Not tainted 2.6.30.10-105.2.23.RODATA.fc11.i586 #1 > > Call Trace: > > [<c0469e58>] ? request_threaded_irq+0x85/0x145 > > [<c0422ab7>] __might_sleep+0xc4/0xc9 > > [<c04a4322>] kmem_cache_alloc_notrace+0x29/0xb0 > > [<c0469e58>] request_threaded_irq+0x85/0x145 > > [<d086439c>] ? do_aha1542_intr_handle+0x0/0x2be [aha1542] > > [<d08696aa>] aha1542_detect+0x631/0x76f [aha1542] > > [<d0869841>] init_this_scsi_driver+0x59/0xc7 [aha1542] > > [<d08697e8>] ? init_this_scsi_driver+0x0/0xc7 [aha1542] > > [<c040114b>] do_one_initcall+0x51/0x13f > > [<c0451111>] sys_init_module+0x8b/0x192 > > [<c0403535>] syscall_call+0x7/0xb > > scsi5 : Adaptec 1542 > > So this one's a bit tricky. aha1542 uses a global spinlock to give it > thread safety and various other things. In this case it's trying to use > the lock to hold off the interrupt until everything is set up. > > Now that we're doing a GFP_KERNEL allocation in the interrupt handler > code you can't disable interrupts while calling request_irq since this > is an old card liable to spurious interrupts as it gets poked in setup. > > I think a possible solution is this, since the mere act of installing an > interrupt handler shouldn't trigger the problem. > > However, I thought the pattern of disabling interrupts and setting up > the handler and registers was a common one ... is there some way this is > supposed to work now that doesn't involve altering the drivers? Most drivers do the sane thing: Disable interrupts at the device level Install handler via request_irq() Setup stuff Enable interrupts at the device level So no, there is no way this is supposed to work with drivers which don't follow that simple scheme. commit 0e43785c5 (irq: use GFP_KERNEL for action allocation in request_irq()) changed that particular instance to GFP_KERNEL because the request_irq code calls (and always did) code which cannot be called in atomic contexts, e.g. the proc entry handling. Thanks, tglx ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: aha1542 oops caused by new request_irq routines 2010-05-31 16:43 ` Thomas Gleixner @ 2010-05-31 16:59 ` James Bottomley 2010-05-31 17:19 ` Thomas Gleixner 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: James Bottomley @ 2010-05-31 16:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Thomas Gleixner; +Cc: Tedheadster, linux-scsi, linux-kernel On Mon, 2010-05-31 at 18:43 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Mon, 31 May 2010, James Bottomley wrote: > > > On Mon, 2010-05-31 at 10:03 -0400, Tedheadster wrote: > > > I'm reliably getting this oops: > > > > > > Configuring Adaptec (SCSI-ID 6) at IO:334, IRQ 10, DMA priority 6 > > > BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at mm/slub.c:1598 > > > in_atomic(): 0, irqs_disabled(): 1, pid: 4782, name: modprobe > > > Pid: 4782, comm: modprobe Not tainted 2.6.30.10-105.2.23.RODATA.fc11.i586 #1 > > > Call Trace: > > > [<c0469e58>] ? request_threaded_irq+0x85/0x145 > > > [<c0422ab7>] __might_sleep+0xc4/0xc9 > > > [<c04a4322>] kmem_cache_alloc_notrace+0x29/0xb0 > > > [<c0469e58>] request_threaded_irq+0x85/0x145 > > > [<d086439c>] ? do_aha1542_intr_handle+0x0/0x2be [aha1542] > > > [<d08696aa>] aha1542_detect+0x631/0x76f [aha1542] > > > [<d0869841>] init_this_scsi_driver+0x59/0xc7 [aha1542] > > > [<d08697e8>] ? init_this_scsi_driver+0x0/0xc7 [aha1542] > > > [<c040114b>] do_one_initcall+0x51/0x13f > > > [<c0451111>] sys_init_module+0x8b/0x192 > > > [<c0403535>] syscall_call+0x7/0xb > > > scsi5 : Adaptec 1542 > > > > So this one's a bit tricky. aha1542 uses a global spinlock to give it > > thread safety and various other things. In this case it's trying to use > > the lock to hold off the interrupt until everything is set up. > > > > Now that we're doing a GFP_KERNEL allocation in the interrupt handler > > code you can't disable interrupts while calling request_irq since this > > is an old card liable to spurious interrupts as it gets poked in setup. > > > > I think a possible solution is this, since the mere act of installing an > > interrupt handler shouldn't trigger the problem. > > > > However, I thought the pattern of disabling interrupts and setting up > > the handler and registers was a common one ... is there some way this is > > supposed to work now that doesn't involve altering the drivers? > > Most drivers do the sane thing: > > Disable interrupts at the device level > Install handler via request_irq() > Setup stuff > Enable interrupts at the device level That only works for some hardware ... a lot of older hardware can't disable interrupts; the best you can do is to have the box physically not listening to the line. > So no, there is no way this is supposed to work with drivers which > don't follow that simple scheme. > > commit 0e43785c5 (irq: use GFP_KERNEL for action allocation in > request_irq()) changed that particular instance to GFP_KERNEL because > the request_irq code calls (and always did) code which cannot be > called in atomic contexts, e.g. the proc entry handling. So, like I said, I think we can install the handler without tickling the hardware. Ideally we'd like to install it IRQ_DISABLED and then call enable_irq after we're done with the setup, but that doesn't seem to be possible. James ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: aha1542 oops caused by new request_irq routines 2010-05-31 16:59 ` James Bottomley @ 2010-05-31 17:19 ` Thomas Gleixner 2010-05-31 17:30 ` James Bottomley 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2010-05-31 17:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: James Bottomley; +Cc: Tedheadster, linux-scsi, linux-kernel On Mon, 31 May 2010, James Bottomley wrote: > On Mon, 2010-05-31 at 18:43 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > On Mon, 31 May 2010, James Bottomley wrote: > > > > > On Mon, 2010-05-31 at 10:03 -0400, Tedheadster wrote: > > > > I'm reliably getting this oops: > > > > > > > > Configuring Adaptec (SCSI-ID 6) at IO:334, IRQ 10, DMA priority 6 > > > > BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at mm/slub.c:1598 > > > > in_atomic(): 0, irqs_disabled(): 1, pid: 4782, name: modprobe > > > > Pid: 4782, comm: modprobe Not tainted 2.6.30.10-105.2.23.RODATA.fc11.i586 #1 > > > > Call Trace: > > > > [<c0469e58>] ? request_threaded_irq+0x85/0x145 > > > > [<c0422ab7>] __might_sleep+0xc4/0xc9 > > > > [<c04a4322>] kmem_cache_alloc_notrace+0x29/0xb0 > > > > [<c0469e58>] request_threaded_irq+0x85/0x145 > > > > [<d086439c>] ? do_aha1542_intr_handle+0x0/0x2be [aha1542] > > > > [<d08696aa>] aha1542_detect+0x631/0x76f [aha1542] > > > > [<d0869841>] init_this_scsi_driver+0x59/0xc7 [aha1542] > > > > [<d08697e8>] ? init_this_scsi_driver+0x0/0xc7 [aha1542] > > > > [<c040114b>] do_one_initcall+0x51/0x13f > > > > [<c0451111>] sys_init_module+0x8b/0x192 > > > > [<c0403535>] syscall_call+0x7/0xb > > > > scsi5 : Adaptec 1542 > > > > > > So this one's a bit tricky. aha1542 uses a global spinlock to give it > > > thread safety and various other things. In this case it's trying to use > > > the lock to hold off the interrupt until everything is set up. > > > > > > Now that we're doing a GFP_KERNEL allocation in the interrupt handler > > > code you can't disable interrupts while calling request_irq since this > > > is an old card liable to spurious interrupts as it gets poked in setup. > > > > > > I think a possible solution is this, since the mere act of installing an > > > interrupt handler shouldn't trigger the problem. > > > > > > However, I thought the pattern of disabling interrupts and setting up > > > the handler and registers was a common one ... is there some way this is > > > supposed to work now that doesn't involve altering the drivers? > > > > Most drivers do the sane thing: > > > > Disable interrupts at the device level > > Install handler via request_irq() > > Setup stuff > > Enable interrupts at the device level > > That only works for some hardware ... a lot of older hardware can't > disable interrupts; the best you can do is to have the box physically > not listening to the line. > > > So no, there is no way this is supposed to work with drivers which > > don't follow that simple scheme. > > > > commit 0e43785c5 (irq: use GFP_KERNEL for action allocation in > > request_irq()) changed that particular instance to GFP_KERNEL because > > the request_irq code calls (and always did) code which cannot be > > called in atomic contexts, e.g. the proc entry handling. > > So, like I said, I think we can install the handler without tickling the > hardware. Ideally we'd like to install it IRQ_DISABLED and then call > enable_irq after we're done with the setup, but that doesn't seem to be > possible. We have a mechanism in place to do that, but it's not available for drivers yet. If that's really a requirement, then we can make it available with very little effort, but that does not resolve the problem when the interrupt is shared and the interrupt line is already enabled. Thanks, tglx ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: aha1542 oops caused by new request_irq routines 2010-05-31 17:19 ` Thomas Gleixner @ 2010-05-31 17:30 ` James Bottomley 0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: James Bottomley @ 2010-05-31 17:30 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Thomas Gleixner; +Cc: Tedheadster, linux-scsi, linux-kernel On Mon, 2010-05-31 at 19:19 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Mon, 31 May 2010, James Bottomley wrote: > > On Mon, 2010-05-31 at 18:43 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > On Mon, 31 May 2010, James Bottomley wrote: > > > > > > > On Mon, 2010-05-31 at 10:03 -0400, Tedheadster wrote: > > > > > I'm reliably getting this oops: > > > > > > > > > > Configuring Adaptec (SCSI-ID 6) at IO:334, IRQ 10, DMA priority 6 > > > > > BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at mm/slub.c:1598 > > > > > in_atomic(): 0, irqs_disabled(): 1, pid: 4782, name: modprobe > > > > > Pid: 4782, comm: modprobe Not tainted 2.6.30.10-105.2.23.RODATA.fc11.i586 #1 > > > > > Call Trace: > > > > > [<c0469e58>] ? request_threaded_irq+0x85/0x145 > > > > > [<c0422ab7>] __might_sleep+0xc4/0xc9 > > > > > [<c04a4322>] kmem_cache_alloc_notrace+0x29/0xb0 > > > > > [<c0469e58>] request_threaded_irq+0x85/0x145 > > > > > [<d086439c>] ? do_aha1542_intr_handle+0x0/0x2be [aha1542] > > > > > [<d08696aa>] aha1542_detect+0x631/0x76f [aha1542] > > > > > [<d0869841>] init_this_scsi_driver+0x59/0xc7 [aha1542] > > > > > [<d08697e8>] ? init_this_scsi_driver+0x0/0xc7 [aha1542] > > > > > [<c040114b>] do_one_initcall+0x51/0x13f > > > > > [<c0451111>] sys_init_module+0x8b/0x192 > > > > > [<c0403535>] syscall_call+0x7/0xb > > > > > scsi5 : Adaptec 1542 > > > > > > > > So this one's a bit tricky. aha1542 uses a global spinlock to give it > > > > thread safety and various other things. In this case it's trying to use > > > > the lock to hold off the interrupt until everything is set up. > > > > > > > > Now that we're doing a GFP_KERNEL allocation in the interrupt handler > > > > code you can't disable interrupts while calling request_irq since this > > > > is an old card liable to spurious interrupts as it gets poked in setup. > > > > > > > > I think a possible solution is this, since the mere act of installing an > > > > interrupt handler shouldn't trigger the problem. > > > > > > > > However, I thought the pattern of disabling interrupts and setting up > > > > the handler and registers was a common one ... is there some way this is > > > > supposed to work now that doesn't involve altering the drivers? > > > > > > Most drivers do the sane thing: > > > > > > Disable interrupts at the device level > > > Install handler via request_irq() > > > Setup stuff > > > Enable interrupts at the device level > > > > That only works for some hardware ... a lot of older hardware can't > > disable interrupts; the best you can do is to have the box physically > > not listening to the line. > > > > > So no, there is no way this is supposed to work with drivers which > > > don't follow that simple scheme. > > > > > > commit 0e43785c5 (irq: use GFP_KERNEL for action allocation in > > > request_irq()) changed that particular instance to GFP_KERNEL because > > > the request_irq code calls (and always did) code which cannot be > > > called in atomic contexts, e.g. the proc entry handling. > > > > So, like I said, I think we can install the handler without tickling the > > hardware. Ideally we'd like to install it IRQ_DISABLED and then call > > enable_irq after we're done with the setup, but that doesn't seem to be > > possible. > > We have a mechanism in place to do that, but it's not available for > drivers yet. If that's really a requirement, then we can make it > available with very little effort, but that does not resolve the > problem when the interrupt is shared and the interrupt line is already > enabled. Heh, well having this problem is usually a reason the driver disallows interrupt sharing. Like I said, I don't see a reason why installing the handler would trigger the interrupt, so lets try just moving the lock first. I'd only need the install disabled if I weren't disabling interrupts during setup, which would be nice, but not necessary since this driver is coded to do that already. James ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2010-05-31 17:30 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <AANLkTilB661W9H9IPxn9TGBvv-omVnAh43r3XR5uM58m@mail.gmail.com>
2010-05-31 14:32 ` aha1542 oops caused by new request_irq routines James Bottomley
2010-05-31 16:43 ` Thomas Gleixner
2010-05-31 16:59 ` James Bottomley
2010-05-31 17:19 ` Thomas Gleixner
2010-05-31 17:30 ` James Bottomley
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®