linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: gioh.kim@lge.com (Gioh Kim)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] [RFC] EHCI: add to memory barrier to updating hw_next
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 19:45:36 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <003101ce846d$1a74ffa0$4f5efee0$@lge.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.1307181004190.1245-100000@iolanthe.rowland.org>

Thanks a lot for your replay.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alan Stern [mailto:stern at rowland.harvard.edu]
> Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2013 11:09 PM
> To: Ming Lei
> Cc: Gioh Kim; linux-usb at vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel at vger.kernel.org;
> Mark Salter; namhyung.kim at lge.com; Minchan Kim; Chanho Min; Jong-Sung Kim;
> linux-arm-kernel
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RFC] EHCI: add to memory barrier to updating hw_next
> 
> On Thu, 18 Jul 2013, Ming Lei wrote:
> 
> > > I guess that HC could have a use-after-free problem like following
> situation.
> > >
> > > 1. A qtd which is not at the queue head should be removed in
> qh_completions().
> > > 2. The last->hw_next become be pointing at the next qtd but the
> hw_next value is delayed in write-buffer.
> > > 3. The qtd is removed in the list.
> > > 4. The qtd is freed into DMA pool and re-allocated for another urb.
> > > 5. HC try to process last->hw_next and it is pointing re-allocated
qtd.
> > >
> > > What do you think about it? Is it possible?
> >
> > I understand it might not be possible because:  when 'stopped' is set,
> > that said the HC might not advance the queue. But I don't understand
> > why 'last->hw_next' is patched here under 'stopped' situation.
> 
> It should not be possible.  When "stopped" is set, the QH gets unlinked
> and relinked before it can start up again.  Relinking involves some memory
> barriers, so the qTD will not be accessed again by the HC.
> 
> last->hw_next gets patched because the qTD might belong to some URB in
> the middle of the queue that is being unlinked.  The URBs before it and
> after it will still be active, so the queue link has to be updated.
> 


You're right. I misunderstand those codes. Please forget about it.


> > Even the 'stopped' case may be seldom triggered, do you know under
> > which condition the stopped is triggered in your problem?(stall, short
> > read or others)
> 
> I was going to ask the same question.  This particular piece of code gets
> executed _only_ when an URB is unlinked.  Not during any other kind of
> error.


I've got the problem when I listened to the mp3 file of USB HDD.
I checked the urb data when the problem occurred, the last-status value of
urb was EINPROGRESS and 
urb->unlinked was ECONNRESET. 
I think the 'stopped' case was occurred by the reset of USB port.
The block device driver did reset USB port because there is no return from
USB device.
If I made block device driver could not reset USB port, the EHCI driver
codes were not executed.
Finally the halt of HC makes 'stopped' case.

I think halt of the HC might be caused that store-buffer delays command for
HC.
When I applied the patch from https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/8/31/344 and added
a mb() into hw_next updating
to remove delay of store-buffer, My platform works well.

Can the store-buffer delay halt HC? Is it possible?

IMHO, if the qTD list is broken the HC think there is no qTD to send.
So I added mb() at hw_next update code.





> 
> Alan Stern

  parent reply	other threads:[~2013-07-19 10:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <000001ce82aa$feac9ee0$fc05dca0$@lge.com>
2013-07-17  8:51 ` [PATCH] [RFC] EHCI: add to memory barrier to updating hw_next Ming Lei
2013-07-18  1:30   ` Gioh Kim
2013-07-18 10:07     ` Ming Lei
2013-07-18 14:08       ` Alan Stern
2013-07-19  3:50         ` Ming Lei
2013-07-19 10:45         ` Gioh Kim [this message]
2013-07-19 15:26           ` Alan Stern

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='003101ce846d$1a74ffa0$4f5efee0$@lge.com' \
    --to=gioh.kim@lge.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).