Thread (13 messages) 13 messages, 5 authors, 2012-07-17

Re: mmc: mxs: DEADLOCK

flat view

From: Lauri Hintsala <hidden>
Date: 2012-07-16 05:57:38
Also in: linux-arm-kernel

Hi Attila,

On 07/12/2012 05:00 PM, Attila Kinali wrote:
I ran into the same problem today, but the proposed fix doesn't seem
to work for me:

---schnipp---
# modprobe libertas_sdio
[   59.200000] lib80211: common routines for IEEE802.11 drivers
[   59.240000] cfg80211: Calling CRDA to update world regulatory domain
[   59.320000] libertas_sdio: Libertas SDIO driver
[   59.330000] libertas_sdio: Copyright Pierre Ossman
# modprobe mxs-mmc
[   64.210000] mxs-mmc 80010000.ssp: initialized
[   64.260000] mxs-mmc 80034000.ssp: initialized
[   64.270000] mmc0: new SDIO card at address 0001
# [   65.440000] libertas_sdio mmc0:0001:1: (unregistered net_device): 00:13:04:80:00:3f, fw 9.70.3p24, cap 0x00000303
[   65.470000]
[   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)
---schnapp---

Any hints how to work around or fix this, would be appreciated

Does this patch fix your issue?
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
--- 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 = {
<<<<<<<

mxs_mmc_enable_sdio_irq was called by mmc_signal_sdio_irq. mmc_signal_sdio_irq was called inside spin lock. So the lock was tried to acquire before it was released.


Best regards,
Lauri Hintsala
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help