From: Abel Vesa <abel.vesa@linaro.org>
To: Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org>
Cc: Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@linaro.org>,
Andy Gross <agross@kernel.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <andersson@kernel.org>,
Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org>,
Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
"vkoul@kernel.org" <vkoul@kernel.org>,
Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@kernel.org>,
Johan Hovold <johan+linaro@kernel.org>,
linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-phy@lists.infradead.org,
devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Lockdep broken on x1e80100 (was: Re: [PATCH v5 0/7] sm8550: Add support for eUSB2 repeater)
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 10:37:30 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZnpzuhXqSLPkpkhn@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZnpoAVGJMG4Zu-Jw@hovoldconsulting.com>
On 24-06-25 08:47:29, Johan Hovold wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 08, 2023 at 09:01:53PM +0200, Abel Vesa wrote:
> > This patchset adds support for the eUSB2 repeater found in pmic PM8550B,
> > used along with SM8550. Since there is no dedicated generic framework
> > for eUSB2 repeaters, the most appropriate subsystem to model it is the
> > generic phy. This patchset also adds support for such repeater to the
> > eUSB2 PHY found in SM8550. Basically, the eUSB2 PHY will have its own
> > "phy" which is actually a repeater.
>
> The decision to model the repeater as a PHY unfortunately breaks lockdep
> as you now have functions like phy_init() calling phy_init() for a
> second PHY (the repeater, see splat below).
>
This was reported by Bjorn off-list a couple of months ago. I did check
it then and the order is perfectly fine. The solution here should be to
use mutex_lock_nested in the PHY framework. This would allow supporting
chain-linked PHYs. The possibility of moving out the repeater out of PHY
was also discussed. Unfortunately, I didn't have the bandwidth to
circle back and properly investigate and fix it.
> As long as the locks are always taken in the same order there should be
> no risk for a deadlock, but can you please verify that and add the
> missing lockdep annotation so that lockdep can be used on platforms like
> x1e80100 (e.g. to prevent further locking issues from being introduced)?
>
> Johan
>
>
> [ 8.613248] ============================================
> [ 8.669073] WARNING: possible recursive locking detected
> [ 8.669074] 6.10.0-rc5 #122 Not tainted
> [ 8.669075] --------------------------------------------
> [ 8.669075] kworker/u50:0/77 is trying to acquire lock:
> [ 8.669076] ffff5cae8733ecf8 (&phy->mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: phy_init+0x4c/0x12c
> [ 8.669087]
> but task is already holding lock:
> [ 8.669088] ffff5cae8a056cf8 (&phy->mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: phy_init+0x4c/0x12c
> [ 8.669092]
> other info that might help us debug this:
> [ 8.669092] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
>
> [ 8.669093] CPU0
> [ 8.669093] ----
> [ 8.669094] lock(&phy->mutex);
> [ 8.669095] lock(&phy->mutex);
> [ 8.669097]
> *** DEADLOCK ***
>
> [ 8.669097] May be due to missing lock nesting notation
>
> [ 8.669097] 4 locks held by kworker/u50:0/77:
> [ 8.669099] #0: ffff5cae80010948 ((wq_completion)events_unbound){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: process_one_work+0x1a4/0x638
> [ 8.669108] #1: ffff800080333de0 (deferred_probe_work){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: process_one_work+0x1cc/0x638
> [ 8.669112] #2: ffff5cae854038f8 (&dev->mutex){....}-{3:3}, at: __device_attach+0x38/0x1d4
> [ 8.669117] #3: ffff5cae8a056cf8 (&phy->mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: phy_init+0x4c/0x12c
> [ 8.669121]
> stack backtrace:
> [ 8.669122] CPU: 9 PID: 77 Comm: kworker/u50:0 Not tainted 6.10.0-rc5 #122
> [ 8.669124] Hardware name: Qualcomm CRD, BIOS 6.0.231221.BOOT.MXF.2.4-00348.1-HAMOA-1 12/21/2023
> [ 8.669125] Workqueue: events_unbound deferred_probe_work_func
> [ 8.669128] Call trace:
> [ 8.669129] dump_backtrace+0x9c/0x11c
> [ 8.870384] show_stack+0x18/0x24
> [ 8.870386] dump_stack_lvl+0x90/0xd0
> [ 8.870391] dump_stack+0x18/0x24
> [ 8.870393] print_deadlock_bug+0x25c/0x348
> [ 8.870396] __lock_acquire+0x10a4/0x2064
> [ 8.870399] lock_acquire.part.0+0xc8/0x20c
> [ 8.870401] lock_acquire+0x68/0x84
> [ 8.870403] __mutex_lock+0x98/0x428
> [ 8.870407] mutex_lock_nested+0x24/0x30
> [ 8.870410] phy_init+0x4c/0x12c
> [ 8.870412] qcom_snps_eusb2_hsphy_init+0x54/0x420 [phy_qcom_snps_eusb2]
> [ 8.870416] phy_init+0xe0/0x12c
> [ 8.870418] dwc3_core_init+0x484/0x1214
> [ 8.870421] dwc3_probe+0xe54/0x171c
> [ 8.870424] platform_probe+0x68/0xd8
> [ 8.870426] really_probe+0xc0/0x388
> [ 8.870427] __driver_probe_device+0x7c/0x160
> [ 8.870429] driver_probe_device+0x40/0x114
> [ 8.870430] __device_attach_driver+0xbc/0x158
> [ 8.870432] bus_for_each_drv+0x84/0xe0
> [ 8.870433] __device_attach+0xa8/0x1d4
> [ 8.870435] device_initial_probe+0x14/0x20
> [ 8.870436] bus_probe_device+0xb0/0xb4
> [ 8.870437] deferred_probe_work_func+0xa0/0xf4
> [ 8.870439] process_one_work+0x224/0x638
> [ 8.870441] worker_thread+0x268/0x3a8
> [ 8.870442] kthread+0x124/0x128
> [ 8.870443] ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-06-25 7:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-02-08 19:01 [PATCH v5 0/7] sm8550: Add support for eUSB2 repeater Abel Vesa
2023-02-08 19:01 ` [PATCH v5 1/7] dt-bindings: phy: Add qcom,snps-eusb2-repeater schema file Abel Vesa
2023-02-08 19:01 ` [PATCH v5 2/7] dt-bindings: mfd: qcom,spmi-pmic: Add pattern property for phy Abel Vesa
2023-02-10 11:43 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2023-02-14 15:36 ` Vinod Koul
2023-02-22 15:16 ` Lee Jones
2023-02-08 19:01 ` [PATCH v5 3/7] dt-bindings: phy: qcom,snps-eusb2-phy: Add phys property for the repeater Abel Vesa
2023-02-08 19:01 ` [PATCH v5 4/7] phy: qcom: Add QCOM SNPS eUSB2 repeater driver Abel Vesa
2023-02-08 19:01 ` [PATCH v5 5/7] phy: qcom: phy-qcom-snps-eusb2: Add support for eUSB2 repeater Abel Vesa
2023-02-08 19:01 ` [PATCH v5 6/7] arm64: dts: qcom: pm8550b: Add eUSB2 repeater node Abel Vesa
2023-02-08 19:02 ` [PATCH v5 7/7] arm64: dts: qcom: sm8550-mtp: " Abel Vesa
2023-02-16 13:12 ` [PATCH v5 0/7] sm8550: Add support for eUSB2 repeater Vinod Koul
2023-03-15 23:34 ` (subset) " Bjorn Andersson
2024-06-25 6:47 ` Lockdep broken on x1e80100 (was: Re: [PATCH v5 0/7] sm8550: Add support for eUSB2 repeater) Johan Hovold
2024-06-25 7:37 ` Abel Vesa [this message]
2024-06-25 8:20 ` Lockdep broken on x1e80100 Neil Armstrong
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=ZnpzuhXqSLPkpkhn@linaro.org \
--to=abel.vesa@linaro.org \
--cc=agross@kernel.org \
--cc=andersson@kernel.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=johan+linaro@kernel.org \
--cc=johan@kernel.org \
--cc=kishon@kernel.org \
--cc=konrad.dybcio@linaro.org \
--cc=krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org \
--cc=lee@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-phy@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=neil.armstrong@linaro.org \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=vkoul@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 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).