From: Will Deacon <willdeacon@google.com>
To: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>
Cc: kernel@esmil.dk, guoren@kernel.org,
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] asm-generic/mmiowb: Get cpu in mmiowb_set_pending
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2020 11:42:46 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200715104246.GA3143299@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <mhng-09237735-4773-4f28-bfb6-b619f1dd4e09@palmerdabbelt-glaptop1>
On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 11:45:11PM -0700, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
> > > > > > > > [<ffffffe00047365e>] regmap_mmio_write32le+0x18/0x46
> > > > > > > > [<ffffffe0005c4c26>] check_preemption_disabled+0xa4/0xaa
> > > > > > > > [<ffffffe00047365e>] regmap_mmio_write32le+0x18/0x46
> > > > > > > > [<ffffffe0004737c8>] regmap_mmio_write+0x26/0x44
> > > > > > > > [<ffffffe0004715c4>] regmap_write+0x28/0x48
> > > > > > > > [<ffffffe00043dccc>] sifive_gpio_probe+0xc0/0x1da
> > > > > > > > [<ffffffe00000113e>] rdinit_setup+0x22/0x26
> > > > > > > > [<ffffffe000469054>] platform_drv_probe+0x24/0x52
> > > > > > > > [<ffffffe000467e16>] really_probe+0x92/0x21a
> > > > > > > > [<ffffffe0004683a8>] device_driver_attach+0x42/0x4a
> > > > > > > > [<ffffffe0004683ac>] device_driver_attach+0x46/0x4a
> > > > > > > > [<ffffffe0004683f0>] __driver_attach+0x40/0xac
> > > > > > > > [<ffffffe0004683ac>] device_driver_attach+0x46/0x4a
> > > > > > > > [<ffffffe000466a3e>] bus_for_each_dev+0x3c/0x64
> > > > > > > > [<ffffffe000467118>] bus_add_driver+0x11e/0x184
> > > > > > > > [<ffffffe00046889a>] driver_register+0x32/0xc6
> > > > > > > > [<ffffffe00000e5ac>] gpiolib_sysfs_init+0xaa/0xae
> > > > > > > > [<ffffffe0000019ec>] do_one_initcall+0x50/0xfc
> > > >
> > > > Hmm.. the problem is that preemption is *not* disabled when
> > > > smp_processor_id is called, right?
> > >
> > > Yes!
> > >
> > > smp_processor_id is defined as:
> > >
> > > * This is the normal accessor to the CPU id and should be used
> > > * whenever possible.
> > > *
> > > * The CPU id is stable when:
> > > *
> > > * - IRQs are disabled;
> > > * - preemption is disabled;
> > > * - the task is CPU affine.
> > > *
> > > * When CONFIG_DEBUG_PREEMPT; we verify these assumption and WARN
> > > * when smp_processor_id() is used when the CPU id is not stable.
> > >
> > > So regmap_write->regmap_mmio_write should be PREEMPT disabled in
> > > sifive_gpio_probe().
> >
> > Ah! Sorry, now I think I understand. So you're saying that the real
> > problem is that the driver framework should have disabled preemption
> > before calling any .probe functions, but for some reason that doesn't
> > happen on RISC-V?
>
> I think it's actually an issue with the generic mmiowb stuff and that we should
> just elide the check. I'm adding Will, for context. I'll send out a patch.
Hmm. Although I _think_ something like the diff below ought to work, are you
sure you want to be doing MMIO writes in preemptible context? Setting
'.disable_locking = true' in 'sifive_gpio_regmap_config' implies to me that
you should be handling the locking within the driver itself, and all the
other regmap writes are protected by '&gc->bgpio_lock'.
Given that riscv is one of the few architectures needing an implementation
of mmiowb(), doing MMIO in a preemptible section seems especially dangerous
as you have no way to ensure completion of the writes without adding an
mmiowb() to the CPU migration path (i.e. context switch).
Will
--->8
diff --git a/include/asm-generic/mmiowb.h b/include/asm-generic/mmiowb.h
index 9439ff037b2d..5698fca3bf56 100644
--- a/include/asm-generic/mmiowb.h
+++ b/include/asm-generic/mmiowb.h
@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@
#include <asm/smp.h>
DECLARE_PER_CPU(struct mmiowb_state, __mmiowb_state);
-#define __mmiowb_state() this_cpu_ptr(&__mmiowb_state)
+#define __mmiowb_state() raw_cpu_ptr(&__mmiowb_state)
#else
#define __mmiowb_state() arch_mmiowb_state()
#endif /* arch_mmiowb_state */
@@ -35,7 +35,9 @@ DECLARE_PER_CPU(struct mmiowb_state, __mmiowb_state);
static inline void mmiowb_set_pending(void)
{
struct mmiowb_state *ms = __mmiowb_state();
- ms->mmiowb_pending = ms->nesting_count;
+
+ if (likely(ms->nesting_count))
+ ms->mmiowb_pending = ms->nesting_count;
}
static inline void mmiowb_spin_lock(void)
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Will Deacon <willdeacon@google.com>
To: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>
Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, kernel@esmil.dk,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
guoren@kernel.org, Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] asm-generic/mmiowb: Get cpu in mmiowb_set_pending
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2020 11:42:46 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200715104246.GA3143299@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <mhng-09237735-4773-4f28-bfb6-b619f1dd4e09@palmerdabbelt-glaptop1>
On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 11:45:11PM -0700, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
> > > > > > > > [<ffffffe00047365e>] regmap_mmio_write32le+0x18/0x46
> > > > > > > > [<ffffffe0005c4c26>] check_preemption_disabled+0xa4/0xaa
> > > > > > > > [<ffffffe00047365e>] regmap_mmio_write32le+0x18/0x46
> > > > > > > > [<ffffffe0004737c8>] regmap_mmio_write+0x26/0x44
> > > > > > > > [<ffffffe0004715c4>] regmap_write+0x28/0x48
> > > > > > > > [<ffffffe00043dccc>] sifive_gpio_probe+0xc0/0x1da
> > > > > > > > [<ffffffe00000113e>] rdinit_setup+0x22/0x26
> > > > > > > > [<ffffffe000469054>] platform_drv_probe+0x24/0x52
> > > > > > > > [<ffffffe000467e16>] really_probe+0x92/0x21a
> > > > > > > > [<ffffffe0004683a8>] device_driver_attach+0x42/0x4a
> > > > > > > > [<ffffffe0004683ac>] device_driver_attach+0x46/0x4a
> > > > > > > > [<ffffffe0004683f0>] __driver_attach+0x40/0xac
> > > > > > > > [<ffffffe0004683ac>] device_driver_attach+0x46/0x4a
> > > > > > > > [<ffffffe000466a3e>] bus_for_each_dev+0x3c/0x64
> > > > > > > > [<ffffffe000467118>] bus_add_driver+0x11e/0x184
> > > > > > > > [<ffffffe00046889a>] driver_register+0x32/0xc6
> > > > > > > > [<ffffffe00000e5ac>] gpiolib_sysfs_init+0xaa/0xae
> > > > > > > > [<ffffffe0000019ec>] do_one_initcall+0x50/0xfc
> > > >
> > > > Hmm.. the problem is that preemption is *not* disabled when
> > > > smp_processor_id is called, right?
> > >
> > > Yes!
> > >
> > > smp_processor_id is defined as:
> > >
> > > * This is the normal accessor to the CPU id and should be used
> > > * whenever possible.
> > > *
> > > * The CPU id is stable when:
> > > *
> > > * - IRQs are disabled;
> > > * - preemption is disabled;
> > > * - the task is CPU affine.
> > > *
> > > * When CONFIG_DEBUG_PREEMPT; we verify these assumption and WARN
> > > * when smp_processor_id() is used when the CPU id is not stable.
> > >
> > > So regmap_write->regmap_mmio_write should be PREEMPT disabled in
> > > sifive_gpio_probe().
> >
> > Ah! Sorry, now I think I understand. So you're saying that the real
> > problem is that the driver framework should have disabled preemption
> > before calling any .probe functions, but for some reason that doesn't
> > happen on RISC-V?
>
> I think it's actually an issue with the generic mmiowb stuff and that we should
> just elide the check. I'm adding Will, for context. I'll send out a patch.
Hmm. Although I _think_ something like the diff below ought to work, are you
sure you want to be doing MMIO writes in preemptible context? Setting
'.disable_locking = true' in 'sifive_gpio_regmap_config' implies to me that
you should be handling the locking within the driver itself, and all the
other regmap writes are protected by '&gc->bgpio_lock'.
Given that riscv is one of the few architectures needing an implementation
of mmiowb(), doing MMIO in a preemptible section seems especially dangerous
as you have no way to ensure completion of the writes without adding an
mmiowb() to the CPU migration path (i.e. context switch).
Will
--->8
diff --git a/include/asm-generic/mmiowb.h b/include/asm-generic/mmiowb.h
index 9439ff037b2d..5698fca3bf56 100644
--- a/include/asm-generic/mmiowb.h
+++ b/include/asm-generic/mmiowb.h
@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@
#include <asm/smp.h>
DECLARE_PER_CPU(struct mmiowb_state, __mmiowb_state);
-#define __mmiowb_state() this_cpu_ptr(&__mmiowb_state)
+#define __mmiowb_state() raw_cpu_ptr(&__mmiowb_state)
#else
#define __mmiowb_state() arch_mmiowb_state()
#endif /* arch_mmiowb_state */
@@ -35,7 +35,9 @@ DECLARE_PER_CPU(struct mmiowb_state, __mmiowb_state);
static inline void mmiowb_set_pending(void)
{
struct mmiowb_state *ms = __mmiowb_state();
- ms->mmiowb_pending = ms->nesting_count;
+
+ if (likely(ms->nesting_count))
+ ms->mmiowb_pending = ms->nesting_count;
}
static inline void mmiowb_spin_lock(void)
_______________________________________________
linux-riscv mailing list
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-07-15 10:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-07-05 14:26 [PATCH] asm-generic/mmiowb: Get cpu in mmiowb_set_pending Emil Renner Berthing
2020-07-05 14:26 ` Emil Renner Berthing
2020-07-05 14:43 ` Guo Ren
2020-07-05 14:43 ` Guo Ren
2020-07-05 14:51 ` Guo Ren
2020-07-05 14:51 ` Guo Ren
2020-07-05 15:19 ` Guo Ren
2020-07-05 15:19 ` Guo Ren
2020-07-05 15:03 ` Emil Renner Berthing
2020-07-05 15:03 ` Emil Renner Berthing
2020-07-05 15:52 ` Guo Ren
2020-07-05 15:52 ` Guo Ren
2020-07-05 17:09 ` Emil Renner Berthing
2020-07-05 17:09 ` Emil Renner Berthing
2020-07-06 0:47 ` Guo Ren
2020-07-06 0:47 ` Guo Ren
2020-07-06 8:08 ` Emil Renner Berthing
2020-07-06 8:08 ` Emil Renner Berthing
2020-07-15 6:45 ` Palmer Dabbelt
2020-07-15 6:45 ` Palmer Dabbelt
2020-07-15 10:42 ` Will Deacon [this message]
2020-07-15 10:42 ` Will Deacon
2020-07-15 14:03 ` Palmer Dabbelt
2020-07-15 14:03 ` Palmer Dabbelt
2020-07-15 14:48 ` Will Deacon
2020-07-15 14:48 ` Will Deacon
2020-07-15 16:41 ` Palmer Dabbelt
2020-07-15 16:41 ` Palmer Dabbelt
2020-07-15 19:28 ` Palmer Dabbelt
2020-07-15 19:28 ` Palmer Dabbelt
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=20200715104246.GA3143299@google.com \
--to=willdeacon@google.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=guoren@kernel.org \
--cc=kernel@esmil.dk \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=palmer@dabbelt.com \
--cc=paul.walmsley@sifive.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.