From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PM / QoS: Fix workqueue deadlock when using pm_qos_update_request_timeout()
Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2013 09:46:26 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <520A62E2.6000309@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130813164315.GB32719@htj.dyndns.org>
On 08/13/13 09:43, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Stephen.
>
> On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 01:13:57PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>> pm_qos_update_request_timeout() updates a qos and then schedules
>> a delayed work item to bring the qos back down to the default
>> after the timeout. When the work item runs, pm_qos_work_fn() will
>> call pm_qos_update_request() and deadlock because it tries to
>> cancel itself via cancel_delayed_work_sync(). Future callers of
>> that qos will also hang waiting to cancel the work that is
>> canceling itself. Before ed1ac6e (PM: don't use
>> [delayed_]work_pending(), 2013-01-11) this didn't happen because
>> the work function wouldn't try to cancel itself.
> I see. That must have been racy tho. If the work item execution
> races someone else queuing the work item, the same deadlock could
> happen, right?
Yes you're right. It was always racy.
>
>> Let's just do the little bit of pm_qos_update_request() here so
>> that we don't deadlock.
>>
>> Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>
>> ---
>> kernel/power/qos.c | 6 +++++-
>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/power/qos.c b/kernel/power/qos.c
>> index 06fe285..d52d314 100644
>> --- a/kernel/power/qos.c
>> +++ b/kernel/power/qos.c
>> @@ -308,7 +308,11 @@ static void pm_qos_work_fn(struct work_struct *work)
>> struct pm_qos_request,
>> work);
>>
>> - pm_qos_update_request(req, PM_QOS_DEFAULT_VALUE);
>> + if (PM_QOS_DEFAULT_VALUE != req->node.prio)
>> + pm_qos_update_target(
>> + pm_qos_array[req->pm_qos_class]->constraints,
>> + &req->node, PM_QOS_UPDATE_REQ,
>> + PM_QOS_DEFAULT_VALUE);
> Maybe it'd be cleaner to add a param or internal variant of
> pm_qos_update_request()?
Maybe, but I was trying to make a minimal fix here.
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-08-13 16:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-08-08 20:13 [PATCH] PM / QoS: Fix workqueue deadlock when using pm_qos_update_request_timeout() Stephen Boyd
2013-08-13 16:37 ` Stephen Boyd
2013-08-13 16:43 ` Tejun Heo
2013-08-13 16:46 ` Stephen Boyd [this message]
2013-08-13 17:01 ` Tejun Heo
2013-08-13 20:49 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-08-13 20:49 ` Stephen Boyd
2013-08-13 21:12 ` Stephen Boyd
2013-08-13 22:13 ` Tejun Heo
2013-08-13 22:54 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
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=520A62E2.6000309@codeaurora.org \
--to=sboyd@codeaurora.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=tj@kernel.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.