* [PATCH] i2c: pca953x: fix a lockdep warning
@ 2016-08-22 13:29 Bartosz Golaszewski
2016-08-22 14:06 ` Linus Walleij
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Bartosz Golaszewski @ 2016-08-22 13:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linus Walleij, Alexandre Courbot; +Cc: linux-gpio, LKML, Bartosz Golaszewski
If an I2C GPIO multiplexer is driven by a GPIO provided by an expander
when there's a second expander using the same device driver on one of
the I2C bus segments, lockdep prints a deadlock warning when trying to
set the direction or the value of the GPIOs provided by the second
expander.
The below diagram presents the setup:
- - - - -
------- --------- Bus segment 1 | |
| | | |--------------- Devices
| | SCL/SDA | | | |
| Linux |-----------| I2C MUX | - - - - -
| | | | | Bus segment 2
| | | | |-------------------
------- | --------- |
| | - - - - -
------------ | MUX GPIO | |
| | | Devices
| GPIO | | | |
| Expander 1 |---- - - - - -
| | |
------------ | SCL/SDA
|
------------
| |
| GPIO |
| Expander 2 |
| |
------------
The reason for lockdep warning is that we take the chip->i2c_lock in
pca953x_gpio_set_value() or pca953x_gpio_direction_output() and then
come right back to pca953x_gpio_set_value() when the GPIO mux kicks
in. The locks actually protect different expanders, but lockdep
doesn't see this and says:
Possible unsafe locking scenario:
CPU0
----
lock(&chip->i2c_lock);
lock(&chip->i2c_lock);
*** DEADLOCK ***
May be due to missing lock nesting notation
To shut lockdep up, use mutex_lock_nested() and use the GPIO base
number as the subclass argument (it has the same type).
NOTE: this only fixes a specific issue we're experiencing with our
setup. The problem would probably occur as well with other I2C
expanders under similar circumstances. A proper fix would probably be
to implement a GPIO expander framework that would unduplicate common
code for all drivers.
Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com>
---
drivers/gpio/gpio-pca953x.c | 7 ++++++-
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-pca953x.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-pca953x.c
index 02f2a56..9086079 100644
--- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-pca953x.c
+++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-pca953x.c
@@ -329,7 +329,12 @@ static void pca953x_gpio_set_value(struct gpio_chip *gc, unsigned off, int val)
u8 reg_val;
int ret, offset = 0;
- mutex_lock(&chip->i2c_lock);
+ /*
+ * We're using mutex_lock_nested() here to avoid a lockdep warning
+ * when there are two pca953x expanders, of which one is used to
+ * control an i2c gpio mux.
+ */
+ mutex_lock_nested(&chip->i2c_lock, chip->gpio_start);
if (val)
reg_val = chip->reg_output[off / BANK_SZ]
| (1u << (off % BANK_SZ));
--
2.7.4
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] i2c: pca953x: fix a lockdep warning
2016-08-22 13:29 [PATCH] i2c: pca953x: fix a lockdep warning Bartosz Golaszewski
@ 2016-08-22 14:06 ` Linus Walleij
2016-08-22 14:15 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Linus Walleij @ 2016-08-22 14:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bartosz Golaszewski, Andy Shevchenko, Vignesh R, Yong Li,
Geert Uytterhoeven
Cc: Alexandre Courbot, linux-gpio, LKML
On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 3:29 PM, Bartosz Golaszewski
<bgolaszewski@baylibre.com> wrote:
The $SUBJECT of this patch should be something beginning with
gpio: atleast.
Apart from that it'd be nice to get review from the other people using
the PCA953x driver, since it's rather complex.
Yours,
Linus Walleij
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] i2c: pca953x: fix a lockdep warning
2016-08-22 14:06 ` Linus Walleij
@ 2016-08-22 14:15 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2016-08-22 14:21 ` Linus Walleij
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Bartosz Golaszewski @ 2016-08-22 14:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linus Walleij
Cc: Andy Shevchenko, Vignesh R, Yong Li, Geert Uytterhoeven,
Alexandre Courbot, linux-gpio, LKML
2016-08-22 16:06 GMT+02:00 Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>:
> On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 3:29 PM, Bartosz Golaszewski
> <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com> wrote:
>
> The $SUBJECT of this patch should be something beginning with
> gpio: atleast.
>
Oops, it was supposed to be gpio, but I was working on i2c stuff and
mixed it. I'll fix that in v2 after getting some reviews.
Best regards,
Bartosz Golaszewski
> Apart from that it'd be nice to get review from the other people using
> the PCA953x driver, since it's rather complex.
>
> Yours,
> Linus Walleij
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] i2c: pca953x: fix a lockdep warning
2016-08-22 14:15 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
@ 2016-08-22 14:21 ` Linus Walleij
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Linus Walleij @ 2016-08-22 14:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bartosz Golaszewski
Cc: Andy Shevchenko, Vignesh R, Yong Li, Geert Uytterhoeven,
Alexandre Courbot, linux-gpio, LKML
On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 4:15 PM, Bartosz Golaszewski
<bgolaszewski@baylibre.com> wrote:
> 2016-08-22 16:06 GMT+02:00 Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>:
>> On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 3:29 PM, Bartosz Golaszewski
>> <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com> wrote:
>>
>> The $SUBJECT of this patch should be something beginning with
>> gpio: atleast.
>>
>
> Oops, it was supposed to be gpio, but I was working on i2c stuff and
> mixed it. I'll fix that in v2 after getting some reviews.
OK! Pls include the people I added on the To: line when you repost.
Yours,
Linus Walleij
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2016-08-22 14:21 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2016-08-22 13:29 [PATCH] i2c: pca953x: fix a lockdep warning Bartosz Golaszewski
2016-08-22 14:06 ` Linus Walleij
2016-08-22 14:15 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2016-08-22 14:21 ` Linus Walleij
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).