Revision v1 of 2 in this series.
5 messages, 2 authors, 2012-08-30 · open the first message on its own page
From: Lauri Hintsala <hidden>
Date: 2012-07-17 14:16:08
Two different deadlock fixes in cases with SDIO IRQs generated by SDIO device. Lauri Hintsala (2): mmc: mxs-mmc: fix deadlock in SDIO IRQ case mmc: mxs-mmc: fix deadlock caused by recursion loop drivers/mmc/host/mxs-mmc.c | 14 +++++++------- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) -- 1.7.9.5
From: Lauri Hintsala <hidden>
Date: 2012-07-17 14:16:09
Release the lock before mmc_signal_sdio_irq is called by mxs_mmc_irq_handler.
Backtrace:
[ 79.660000] =============================================
[ 79.660000] [ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ]
[ 79.660000] 3.4.0-00009-g3e96082-dirty #11 Not tainted
[ 79.660000] ---------------------------------------------
[ 79.660000] swapper/0 is trying to acquire lock:
[ 79.660000] (&(&host->lock)->rlock#2){-.....}, at: [<c026ea3c>] mxs_mmc_enable_sdio_irq+0x18/0xd4
[ 79.660000]
[ 79.660000] but task is already holding lock:
[ 79.660000] (&(&host->lock)->rlock#2){-.....}, at: [<c026f744>] mxs_mmc_irq_handler+0x1c/0xe8
[ 79.660000]
[ 79.660000] other info that might help us debug this:
[ 79.660000] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
[ 79.660000]
[ 79.660000] CPU0
[ 79.660000] ----
[ 79.660000] lock(&(&host->lock)->rlock#2);
[ 79.660000] lock(&(&host->lock)->rlock#2);
[ 79.660000]
[ 79.660000] *** DEADLOCK ***
[ 79.660000]
[ 79.660000] May be due to missing lock nesting notation
[ 79.660000]
[ 79.660000] 1 lock held by swapper/0:
[ 79.660000] #0: (&(&host->lock)->rlock#2){-.....}, at: [<c026f744>] mxs_mmc_irq_handler+0x1c/0xe8
[ 79.660000]
[ 79.660000] stack backtrace:
[ 79.660000] [<c0014bd0>] (unwind_backtrace+0x0/0xf4) from [<c005f9c0>] (__lock_acquire+0x1948/0x1d48)
[ 79.660000] [<c005f9c0>] (__lock_acquire+0x1948/0x1d48) from [<c005fea0>] (lock_acquire+0xe0/0xf8)
[ 79.660000] [<c005fea0>] (lock_acquire+0xe0/0xf8) from [<c03a8460>] (_raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x44/0x58)
[ 79.660000] [<c03a8460>] (_raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x44/0x58) from [<c026ea3c>] (mxs_mmc_enable_sdio_irq+0x18/0xd4)
[ 79.660000] [<c026ea3c>] (mxs_mmc_enable_sdio_irq+0x18/0xd4) from [<c026f7fc>] (mxs_mmc_irq_handler+0xd4/0xe8)
[ 79.660000] [<c026f7fc>] (mxs_mmc_irq_handler+0xd4/0xe8) from [<c006bdd8>] (handle_irq_event_percpu+0x70/0x254)
[ 79.660000] [<c006bdd8>] (handle_irq_event_percpu+0x70/0x254) from [<c006bff8>] (handle_irq_event+0x3c/0x5c)
[ 79.660000] [<c006bff8>] (handle_irq_event+0x3c/0x5c) from [<c006e6d0>] (handle_level_irq+0x90/0x110)
[ 79.660000] [<c006e6d0>] (handle_level_irq+0x90/0x110) from [<c006b930>] (generic_handle_irq+0x38/0x50)
[ 79.660000] [<c006b930>] (generic_handle_irq+0x38/0x50) from [<c00102fc>] (handle_IRQ+0x30/0x84)
[ 79.660000] [<c00102fc>] (handle_IRQ+0x30/0x84) from [<c000f058>] (__irq_svc+0x38/0x60)
[ 79.660000] [<c000f058>] (__irq_svc+0x38/0x60) from [<c0010520>] (default_idle+0x2c/0x40)
[ 79.660000] [<c0010520>] (default_idle+0x2c/0x40) from [<c0010a90>] (cpu_idle+0x64/0xcc)
[ 79.660000] [<c0010a90>] (cpu_idle+0x64/0xcc) from [<c04ff858>] (start_kernel+0x244/0x2c8)
[ 79.660000] BUG: spinlock lockup on CPU#0, swapper/0
[ 79.660000] lock: c398cb2c, .magic: dead4ead, .owner: swapper/0, .owner_cpu: 0
[ 79.660000] [<c0014bd0>] (unwind_backtrace+0x0/0xf4) from [<c01ddb1c>] (do_raw_spin_lock+0xf0/0x144)
[ 79.660000] [<c01ddb1c>] (do_raw_spin_lock+0xf0/0x144) from [<c03a8468>] (_raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x4c/0x58)
[ 79.660000] [<c03a8468>] (_raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x4c/0x58) from [<c026ea3c>] (mxs_mmc_enable_sdio_irq+0x18/0xd4)
[ 79.660000] [<c026ea3c>] (mxs_mmc_enable_sdio_irq+0x18/0xd4) from [<c026f7fc>] (mxs_mmc_irq_handler+0xd4/0xe8)
[ 79.660000] [<c026f7fc>] (mxs_mmc_irq_handler+0xd4/0xe8) from [<c006bdd8>] (handle_irq_event_percpu+0x70/0x254)
[ 79.660000] [<c006bdd8>] (handle_irq_event_percpu+0x70/0x254) from [<c006bff8>] (handle_irq_event+0x3c/0x5c)
[ 79.660000] [<c006bff8>] (handle_irq_event+0x3c/0x5c) from [<c006e6d0>] (handle_level_irq+0x90/0x110)
[ 79.660000] [<c006e6d0>] (handle_level_irq+0x90/0x110) from [<c006b930>] (generic_handle_irq+0x38/0x50)
[ 79.660000] [<c006b930>] (generic_handle_irq+0x38/0x50) from [<c00102fc>] (handle_IRQ+0x30/0x84)
[ 79.660000] [<c00102fc>] (handle_IRQ+0x30/0x84) from [<c000f058>] (__irq_svc+0x38/0x60)
[ 79.660000] [<c000f058>] (__irq_svc+0x38/0x60) from [<c0010520>] (default_idle+0x2c/0x40)
[ 79.660000] [<c0010520>] (default_idle+0x2c/0x40) from [<c0010a90>] (cpu_idle+0x64/0xcc)
[ 79.660000] [<c0010a90>] (cpu_idle+0x64/0xcc) from [<c04ff858>] (start_kernel+0x244/0x2c8)
Signed-off-by: Lauri Hintsala <redacted>
Acked-by: Shawn Guo <redacted>
---
drivers/mmc/host/mxs-mmc.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/mxs-mmc.c b/drivers/mmc/host/mxs-mmc.c
index 277161d..20a0550 100644
--- a/drivers/mmc/host/mxs-mmc.c
+++ b/drivers/mmc/host/mxs-mmc.c@@ -278,11 +278,11 @@ static irqreturn_t mxs_mmc_irq_handler(int irq, void *dev_id) writel(stat & MXS_MMC_IRQ_BITS, host->base + HW_SSP_CTRL1(host) + STMP_OFFSET_REG_CLR); + spin_unlock(&host->lock); + if ((stat & BM_SSP_CTRL1_SDIO_IRQ) && (stat & BM_SSP_CTRL1_SDIO_IRQ_EN)) mmc_signal_sdio_irq(host->mmc); - spin_unlock(&host->lock); - if (stat & BM_SSP_CTRL1_RESP_TIMEOUT_IRQ) cmd->error = -ETIMEDOUT; else if (stat & BM_SSP_CTRL1_RESP_ERR_IRQ)
--
1.7.9.5
From: Lauri Hintsala <hidden>
Date: 2012-07-17 14:16:10
Release the lock before mmc_signal_sdio_irq is called by
mxs_mmc_enable_sdio_irq.
Backtrace:
[ 65.470000] =============================================
[ 65.470000] [ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ]
[ 65.470000] 3.5.0-rc5 #2 Not tainted
[ 65.470000] ---------------------------------------------
[ 65.470000] ksdioirqd/mmc0/73 is trying to acquire lock:
[ 65.470000] (&(&host->lock)->rlock#2){-.-...}, at: [<bf054120>] mxs_mmc_enable_sdio_irq+0x18/0xdc [mxs_mmc]
[ 65.470000]
[ 65.470000] but task is already holding lock:
[ 65.470000] (&(&host->lock)->rlock#2){-.-...}, at: [<bf054120>] mxs_mmc_enable_sdio_irq+0x18/0xdc [mxs_mmc]
[ 65.470000]
[ 65.470000] other info that might help us debug this:
[ 65.470000] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
[ 65.470000]
[ 65.470000] CPU0
[ 65.470000] ----
[ 65.470000] lock(&(&host->lock)->rlock#2);
[ 65.470000] lock(&(&host->lock)->rlock#2);
[ 65.470000]
[ 65.470000] *** DEADLOCK ***
[ 65.470000]
[ 65.470000] May be due to missing lock nesting notation
[ 65.470000]
[ 65.470000] 1 lock held by ksdioirqd/mmc0/73:
[ 65.470000] #0: (&(&host->lock)->rlock#2){-.-...}, at: [<bf054120>] mxs_mmc_enable_sdio_irq+0x18/0xdc [mxs_mmc]
[ 65.470000]
[ 65.470000] stack backtrace:
[ 65.470000] [<c0014990>] (unwind_backtrace+0x0/0xf4) from [<c005ccb8>] (__lock_acquire+0x14f8/0x1b98)
[ 65.470000] [<c005ccb8>] (__lock_acquire+0x14f8/0x1b98) from [<c005d3f8>] (lock_acquire+0xa0/0x108)
[ 65.470000] [<c005d3f8>] (lock_acquire+0xa0/0x108) from [<c02f671c>] (_raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x48/0x5c)
[ 65.470000] [<c02f671c>] (_raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x48/0x5c) from [<bf054120>] (mxs_mmc_enable_sdio_irq+0x18/0xdc [mxs_mmc])
[ 65.470000] [<bf054120>] (mxs_mmc_enable_sdio_irq+0x18/0xdc [mxs_mmc]) from [<bf0541d0>] (mxs_mmc_enable_sdio_irq+0xc8/0xdc [mxs_mmc])
[ 65.470000] [<bf0541d0>] (mxs_mmc_enable_sdio_irq+0xc8/0xdc [mxs_mmc]) from [<c0219b38>] (sdio_irq_thread+0x1bc/0x274)
[ 65.470000] [<c0219b38>] (sdio_irq_thread+0x1bc/0x274) from [<c003c324>] (kthread+0x8c/0x98)
[ 65.470000] [<c003c324>] (kthread+0x8c/0x98) from [<c00101ac>] (kernel_thread_exit+0x0/0x8)
[ 65.470000] BUG: spinlock lockup suspected on CPU#0, ksdioirqd/mmc0/73
[ 65.470000] lock: 0xc3358724, .magic: dead4ead, .owner: ksdioirqd/mmc0/73, .owner_cpu: 0
[ 65.470000] [<c0014990>] (unwind_backtrace+0x0/0xf4) from [<c01b46b0>] (do_raw_spin_lock+0x100/0x144)
[ 65.470000] [<c01b46b0>] (do_raw_spin_lock+0x100/0x144) from [<c02f6724>] (_raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x50/0x5c)
[ 65.470000] [<c02f6724>] (_raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x50/0x5c) from [<bf054120>] (mxs_mmc_enable_sdio_irq+0x18/0xdc [mxs_mmc])
[ 65.470000] [<bf054120>] (mxs_mmc_enable_sdio_irq+0x18/0xdc [mxs_mmc]) from [<bf0541d0>] (mxs_mmc_enable_sdio_irq+0xc8/0xdc [mxs_mmc])
[ 65.470000] [<bf0541d0>] (mxs_mmc_enable_sdio_irq+0xc8/0xdc [mxs_mmc]) from [<c0219b38>] (sdio_irq_thread+0x1bc/0x274)
[ 65.470000] [<c0219b38>] (sdio_irq_thread+0x1bc/0x274) from [<c003c324>] (kthread+0x8c/0x98)
[ 65.470000] [<c003c324>] (kthread+0x8c/0x98) from [<c00101ac>] (kernel_thread_exit+0x0/0x8)
Reported-by: Attila Kinali <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Lauri Hintsala <redacted>
Acked-by: Shawn Guo <redacted>
---
drivers/mmc/host/mxs-mmc.c | 10 +++++-----
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/mxs-mmc.c b/drivers/mmc/host/mxs-mmc.c
index 20a0550..e1fd2c8 100644
--- a/drivers/mmc/host/mxs-mmc.c
+++ b/drivers/mmc/host/mxs-mmc.c@@ -637,11 +637,6 @@ static void mxs_mmc_enable_sdio_irq(struct mmc_host *mmc, int enable) host->base + HW_SSP_CTRL0 + STMP_OFFSET_REG_SET); writel(BM_SSP_CTRL1_SDIO_IRQ_EN, host->base + HW_SSP_CTRL1(host) + STMP_OFFSET_REG_SET); - - if (readl(host->base + HW_SSP_STATUS(host)) & - BM_SSP_STATUS_SDIO_IRQ) - mmc_signal_sdio_irq(host->mmc); - } else { writel(BM_SSP_CTRL0_SDIO_IRQ_CHECK, host->base + HW_SSP_CTRL0 + STMP_OFFSET_REG_CLR);
@@ -650,6 +645,11 @@ static void mxs_mmc_enable_sdio_irq(struct mmc_host *mmc, int enable) } spin_unlock_irqrestore(&host->lock, flags); + + if (enable && readl(host->base + HW_SSP_STATUS(host)) & + BM_SSP_STATUS_SDIO_IRQ) + mmc_signal_sdio_irq(host->mmc); + } static const struct mmc_host_ops mxs_mmc_ops = {
--
1.7.9.5
From: Lauri Hintsala <hidden>
Date: 2012-08-28 08:08:24
On 07/17/2012 05:16 PM, Lauri Hintsala wrote:
Two different deadlock fixes in cases with SDIO IRQs generated by SDIO device.
Any comments? Could they be applied? BR, Lauri
Lauri Hintsala (2): mmc: mxs-mmc: fix deadlock in SDIO IRQ case mmc: mxs-mmc: fix deadlock caused by recursion loop drivers/mmc/host/mxs-mmc.c | 14 +++++++------- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
From: Shawn Guo <hidden>
Date: 2012-08-30 21:05:43
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 11:08:24AM +0300, Lauri Hintsala wrote:
On 07/17/2012 05:16 PM, Lauri Hintsala wrote:quoted
Two different deadlock fixes in cases with SDIO IRQs generated by SDIO device.Any comments? Could they be applied?
Chris, can you please send these two fixes for 3.6? Also, stable should be Cc-ed. -- Regards, Shawn