linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: marex@denx.de (Marek Vasut)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] gpio: mxs: Allow for recursive enable_irq_wake() call
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2014 03:38:10 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1395628690-7225-1-git-send-email-marex@denx.de> (raw)

The scenario here is that someone calls enable_irq_wake() from somewhere
in the code. This will result in the lockdep producing a backtrace as can
be seen below. In my case, this problem is triggered when using the wl1271
(TI WlCore) driver found in drivers/net/wireless/ti/ .

The problem cause is rather obvious from the backtrace, but let's outline
the dependency. enable_irq_wake() grabs the IRQ buslock in irq_set_irq_wake(),
which in turns calls mxs_gpio_set_wake_irq() . But mxs_gpio_set_wake_irq()
calls enable_irq_wake() again on the one-level-higher IRQ , thus it tries to
grab the IRQ buslock again in irq_set_irq_wake() . Because the spinlock in
irq_set_irq_wake()->irq_get_desc_buslock()->__irq_get_desc_lock() is not
marked as recursive, lockdep will spew the stuff below.

We know we can safely re-enter the lock, so use IRQ_GC_INIT_NESTED_LOCK to
fix the spew.

 =============================================
 [ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ]
 3.10.33-00012-gf06b763-dirty #61 Not tainted
 ---------------------------------------------
 kworker/0:1/18 is trying to acquire lock:
  (&irq_desc_lock_class){-.-...}, at: [<c00685f0>] __irq_get_desc_lock+0x48/0x88

 but task is already holding lock:
  (&irq_desc_lock_class){-.-...}, at: [<c00685f0>] __irq_get_desc_lock+0x48/0x88

 other info that might help us debug this:
  Possible unsafe locking scenario:

        CPU0
        ----
   lock(&irq_desc_lock_class);
   lock(&irq_desc_lock_class);

  *** DEADLOCK ***

  May be due to missing lock nesting notation

 3 locks held by kworker/0:1/18:
  #0:  (events){.+.+.+}, at: [<c0036308>] process_one_work+0x134/0x4a4
  #1:  ((&fw_work->work)){+.+.+.}, at: [<c0036308>] process_one_work+0x134/0x4a4
  #2:  (&irq_desc_lock_class){-.-...}, at: [<c00685f0>] __irq_get_desc_lock+0x48/0x88

 stack backtrace:
 CPU: 0 PID: 18 Comm: kworker/0:1 Not tainted 3.10.33-00012-gf06b763-dirty #61
 Workqueue: events request_firmware_work_func
 [<c0013eb4>] (unwind_backtrace+0x0/0xf0) from [<c0011c74>] (show_stack+0x10/0x14)
 [<c0011c74>] (show_stack+0x10/0x14) from [<c005bb08>] (__lock_acquire+0x140c/0x1a64)
 [<c005bb08>] (__lock_acquire+0x140c/0x1a64) from [<c005c6a8>] (lock_acquire+0x9c/0x104)
 [<c005c6a8>] (lock_acquire+0x9c/0x104) from [<c051d5a4>] (_raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x44/0x58)
 [<c051d5a4>] (_raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x44/0x58) from [<c00685f0>] (__irq_get_desc_lock+0x48/0x88)
 [<c00685f0>] (__irq_get_desc_lock+0x48/0x88) from [<c0068e78>] (irq_set_irq_wake+0x20/0xf4)
 [<c0068e78>] (irq_set_irq_wake+0x20/0xf4) from [<c027260c>] (mxs_gpio_set_wake_irq+0x1c/0x24)
 [<c027260c>] (mxs_gpio_set_wake_irq+0x1c/0x24) from [<c0068cf4>] (set_irq_wake_real+0x30/0x44)
 [<c0068cf4>] (set_irq_wake_real+0x30/0x44) from [<c0068ee4>] (irq_set_irq_wake+0x8c/0xf4)
 [<c0068ee4>] (irq_set_irq_wake+0x8c/0xf4) from [<c0310748>] (wlcore_nvs_cb+0x10c/0x97c)
 [<c0310748>] (wlcore_nvs_cb+0x10c/0x97c) from [<c02be5e8>] (request_firmware_work_func+0x38/0x58)
 [<c02be5e8>] (request_firmware_work_func+0x38/0x58) from [<c0036394>] (process_one_work+0x1c0/0x4a4)
 [<c0036394>] (process_one_work+0x1c0/0x4a4) from [<c0036a4c>] (worker_thread+0x138/0x394)
 [<c0036a4c>] (worker_thread+0x138/0x394) from [<c003cb74>] (kthread+0xa4/0xb0)
 [<c003cb74>] (kthread+0xa4/0xb0) from [<c000ee00>] (ret_from_fork+0x14/0x34)
 wlcore: loaded

Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de>
Cc: Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@linaro.org>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
---
 drivers/gpio/gpio-mxs.c | 3 ++-
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

NOTE 1: I think this should go into -stable as well eventually.
NOTE 2: I developed this on 3.10.33, but I still see this is not fixed in -next.

diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-mxs.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-mxs.c
index f8e6af2..d599fc4 100644
--- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-mxs.c
+++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-mxs.c
@@ -214,7 +214,8 @@ static void __init mxs_gpio_init_gc(struct mxs_gpio_port *port, int irq_base)
 	ct->regs.ack = PINCTRL_IRQSTAT(port) + MXS_CLR;
 	ct->regs.mask = PINCTRL_IRQEN(port);
 
-	irq_setup_generic_chip(gc, IRQ_MSK(32), 0, IRQ_NOREQUEST, 0);
+	irq_setup_generic_chip(gc, IRQ_MSK(32), IRQ_GC_INIT_NESTED_LOCK,
+			       IRQ_NOREQUEST, 0);
 }
 
 static int mxs_gpio_to_irq(struct gpio_chip *gc, unsigned offset)
-- 
1.9.0

             reply	other threads:[~2014-03-24  2:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-03-24  2:38 Marek Vasut [this message]
2014-03-24  4:34 ` [PATCH] gpio: mxs: Allow for recursive enable_irq_wake() call Shawn Guo
2014-03-27  9:15 ` Linus Walleij
2014-04-09 14:26   ` Shawn Guo
2014-04-10 18:20     ` Linus Walleij

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=1395628690-7225-1-git-send-email-marex@denx.de \
    --to=marex@denx.de \
    --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).