All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
To: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, nfont@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
	mpe@ellerman.id.au
Cc: paulus@samba.org, anton@samba.org, kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc/rtas: Introduce rtas_get_sensor_fast() for IRQ handlers
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2015 12:13:12 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <215321757.310885.1438171992415.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1437130018-3430-1-git-send-email-thuth@redhat.com>

----- Original Message -----
> The EPOW interrupt handler uses rtas_get_sensor(), which in turn
> uses rtas_busy_delay() to wait for RTAS becoming ready in case it
> is necessary. But rtas_busy_delay() is annotated with might_sleep()
> and thus may not be used by interrupts handlers like the EPOW handler!
> This leads to the following BUG when CONFIG_DEBUG_ATOMIC_SLEEP is
> enabled:
> 
>  BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at
>  arch/powerpc/kernel/rtas.c:496
>  in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 1, pid: 0, name: swapper/1
>  CPU: 1 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/1 Not tainted 4.2.0-rc2-thuth #6
>  Call Trace:
>  [c00000007ffe7b90] [c000000000807670] dump_stack+0xa0/0xdc (unreliable)
>  [c00000007ffe7bc0] [c0000000000e1f14] ___might_sleep+0x134/0x180
>  [c00000007ffe7c20] [c00000000002aec0] rtas_busy_delay+0x30/0xd0
>  [c00000007ffe7c50] [c00000000002bde4] rtas_get_sensor+0x74/0xe0
>  [c00000007ffe7ce0] [c000000000083264] ras_epow_interrupt+0x44/0x450
>  [c00000007ffe7d90] [c000000000120260] handle_irq_event_percpu+0xa0/0x300
>  [c00000007ffe7e70] [c000000000120524] handle_irq_event+0x64/0xc0
>  [c00000007ffe7eb0] [c000000000124dbc] handle_fasteoi_irq+0xec/0x260
>  [c00000007ffe7ef0] [c00000000011f4f0] generic_handle_irq+0x50/0x80
>  [c00000007ffe7f20] [c000000000010f3c] __do_irq+0x8c/0x200
>  [c00000007ffe7f90] [c0000000000236cc] call_do_irq+0x14/0x24
>  [c00000007e6f39e0] [c000000000011144] do_IRQ+0x94/0x110
>  [c00000007e6f3a30] [c000000000002594] hardware_interrupt_common+0x114/0x180
> 
> Fix this issue by introducing a new rtas_get_sensor_fast() function
> that does not use rtas_busy_delay() - and thus can only be used for
> sensors that do not cause a BUSY condition (which should be the case
> for the sensor that is queried by the EPOW IRQ handler).
> 
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
> ---
>  arch/powerpc/include/asm/rtas.h      |  1 +
>  arch/powerpc/kernel/rtas.c           | 17 +++++++++++++++++
>  arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/ras.c |  3 ++-
>  3 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/rtas.h
> b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/rtas.h
> index 7a4ede1..b77ef36 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/rtas.h
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/rtas.h
> @@ -343,6 +343,7 @@ extern void rtas_power_off(void);
>  extern void rtas_halt(void);
>  extern void rtas_os_term(char *str);
>  extern int rtas_get_sensor(int sensor, int index, int *state);
> +extern int rtas_get_sensor_fast(int sensor, int index, int *state);
>  extern int rtas_get_power_level(int powerdomain, int *level);
>  extern int rtas_set_power_level(int powerdomain, int level, int *setlevel);
>  extern bool rtas_indicator_present(int token, int *maxindex);
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/rtas.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/rtas.c
> index 7a488c1..caffb10 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/rtas.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/rtas.c
> @@ -584,6 +584,23 @@ int rtas_get_sensor(int sensor, int index, int *state)
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(rtas_get_sensor);
>  
> +int rtas_get_sensor_fast(int sensor, int index, int *state)
> +{
> +	int token = rtas_token("get-sensor-state");
> +	int rc;
> +
> +	if (token = RTAS_UNKNOWN_SERVICE)
> +		return -ENOENT;
> +
> +	rc = rtas_call(token, 2, 2, state, sensor, index);
> +	WARN_ON(rc = RTAS_BUSY || (rc >= RTAS_EXTENDED_DELAY_MIN &&
> +				    rc <= RTAS_EXTENDED_DELAY_MAX));
> +
> +	if (rc < 0)
> +		return rtas_error_rc(rc);
> +	return rc;
> +}
> +
>  bool rtas_indicator_present(int token, int *maxindex)
>  {
>  	int proplen, count, i;
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/ras.c
> b/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/ras.c
> index 02e4a17..3b6647e 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/ras.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/ras.c
> @@ -189,7 +189,8 @@ static irqreturn_t ras_epow_interrupt(int irq, void
> *dev_id)
>  	int state;
>  	int critical;
>  
> -	status = rtas_get_sensor(EPOW_SENSOR_TOKEN, EPOW_SENSOR_INDEX, &state);
> +	status = rtas_get_sensor_fast(EPOW_SENSOR_TOKEN, EPOW_SENSOR_INDEX,
> +				      &state);
>  
>  	if (state > 3)
>  		critical = 1;		/* Time Critical */
> --
> 1.8.3.1

*ping*

Michael, do you think this patch is OK for fixing this problem?
Or shall I rather send a patch to simply revert 587f83e8dd50d instead?

 Thomas

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
To: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, nfont@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
	mpe@ellerman.id.au
Cc: paulus@samba.org, anton@samba.org, kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc/rtas: Introduce rtas_get_sensor_fast() for IRQ handlers
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2015 08:13:12 -0400 (EDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <215321757.310885.1438171992415.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1437130018-3430-1-git-send-email-thuth@redhat.com>

----- Original Message -----
> The EPOW interrupt handler uses rtas_get_sensor(), which in turn
> uses rtas_busy_delay() to wait for RTAS becoming ready in case it
> is necessary. But rtas_busy_delay() is annotated with might_sleep()
> and thus may not be used by interrupts handlers like the EPOW handler!
> This leads to the following BUG when CONFIG_DEBUG_ATOMIC_SLEEP is
> enabled:
> 
>  BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at
>  arch/powerpc/kernel/rtas.c:496
>  in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 1, pid: 0, name: swapper/1
>  CPU: 1 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/1 Not tainted 4.2.0-rc2-thuth #6
>  Call Trace:
>  [c00000007ffe7b90] [c000000000807670] dump_stack+0xa0/0xdc (unreliable)
>  [c00000007ffe7bc0] [c0000000000e1f14] ___might_sleep+0x134/0x180
>  [c00000007ffe7c20] [c00000000002aec0] rtas_busy_delay+0x30/0xd0
>  [c00000007ffe7c50] [c00000000002bde4] rtas_get_sensor+0x74/0xe0
>  [c00000007ffe7ce0] [c000000000083264] ras_epow_interrupt+0x44/0x450
>  [c00000007ffe7d90] [c000000000120260] handle_irq_event_percpu+0xa0/0x300
>  [c00000007ffe7e70] [c000000000120524] handle_irq_event+0x64/0xc0
>  [c00000007ffe7eb0] [c000000000124dbc] handle_fasteoi_irq+0xec/0x260
>  [c00000007ffe7ef0] [c00000000011f4f0] generic_handle_irq+0x50/0x80
>  [c00000007ffe7f20] [c000000000010f3c] __do_irq+0x8c/0x200
>  [c00000007ffe7f90] [c0000000000236cc] call_do_irq+0x14/0x24
>  [c00000007e6f39e0] [c000000000011144] do_IRQ+0x94/0x110
>  [c00000007e6f3a30] [c000000000002594] hardware_interrupt_common+0x114/0x180
> 
> Fix this issue by introducing a new rtas_get_sensor_fast() function
> that does not use rtas_busy_delay() - and thus can only be used for
> sensors that do not cause a BUSY condition (which should be the case
> for the sensor that is queried by the EPOW IRQ handler).
> 
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
> ---
>  arch/powerpc/include/asm/rtas.h      |  1 +
>  arch/powerpc/kernel/rtas.c           | 17 +++++++++++++++++
>  arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/ras.c |  3 ++-
>  3 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/rtas.h
> b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/rtas.h
> index 7a4ede1..b77ef36 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/rtas.h
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/rtas.h
> @@ -343,6 +343,7 @@ extern void rtas_power_off(void);
>  extern void rtas_halt(void);
>  extern void rtas_os_term(char *str);
>  extern int rtas_get_sensor(int sensor, int index, int *state);
> +extern int rtas_get_sensor_fast(int sensor, int index, int *state);
>  extern int rtas_get_power_level(int powerdomain, int *level);
>  extern int rtas_set_power_level(int powerdomain, int level, int *setlevel);
>  extern bool rtas_indicator_present(int token, int *maxindex);
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/rtas.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/rtas.c
> index 7a488c1..caffb10 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/rtas.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/rtas.c
> @@ -584,6 +584,23 @@ int rtas_get_sensor(int sensor, int index, int *state)
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(rtas_get_sensor);
>  
> +int rtas_get_sensor_fast(int sensor, int index, int *state)
> +{
> +	int token = rtas_token("get-sensor-state");
> +	int rc;
> +
> +	if (token == RTAS_UNKNOWN_SERVICE)
> +		return -ENOENT;
> +
> +	rc = rtas_call(token, 2, 2, state, sensor, index);
> +	WARN_ON(rc == RTAS_BUSY || (rc >= RTAS_EXTENDED_DELAY_MIN &&
> +				    rc <= RTAS_EXTENDED_DELAY_MAX));
> +
> +	if (rc < 0)
> +		return rtas_error_rc(rc);
> +	return rc;
> +}
> +
>  bool rtas_indicator_present(int token, int *maxindex)
>  {
>  	int proplen, count, i;
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/ras.c
> b/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/ras.c
> index 02e4a17..3b6647e 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/ras.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/ras.c
> @@ -189,7 +189,8 @@ static irqreturn_t ras_epow_interrupt(int irq, void
> *dev_id)
>  	int state;
>  	int critical;
>  
> -	status = rtas_get_sensor(EPOW_SENSOR_TOKEN, EPOW_SENSOR_INDEX, &state);
> +	status = rtas_get_sensor_fast(EPOW_SENSOR_TOKEN, EPOW_SENSOR_INDEX,
> +				      &state);
>  
>  	if (state > 3)
>  		critical = 1;		/* Time Critical */
> --
> 1.8.3.1

*ping*

Michael, do you think this patch is OK for fixing this problem?
Or shall I rather send a patch to simply revert 587f83e8dd50d instead?

 Thomas

  parent reply	other threads:[~2015-07-29 12:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-07-17 10:46 [PATCH] powerpc/rtas: Introduce rtas_get_sensor_fast() for IRQ handlers Thomas Huth
2015-07-17 10:46 ` Thomas Huth
2015-07-20 15:11 ` Nathan Fontenot
2015-07-20 15:11   ` Nathan Fontenot
2015-07-22 11:25 ` Michael Ellerman
2015-07-22 11:25   ` Michael Ellerman
2015-07-22 11:40   ` Thomas Huth
2015-07-22 11:40     ` Thomas Huth
2015-08-03  1:35   ` Michael Ellerman
2015-08-03  1:35     ` Michael Ellerman
2015-07-29 12:13 ` Thomas Huth [this message]
2015-07-29 12:13   ` [PATCH] " Thomas Huth

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=215321757.310885.1438171992415.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com \
    --to=thuth@redhat.com \
    --cc=anton@samba.org \
    --cc=kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=nfont@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    /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.