Re: [PATCH 2/2] iommu/tegra-gart: Add support for struct iommu_device

Dmitry Osipenko
2017-08-17T17:17:53Z

On 17.08.2017 16:52, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 01:21:52AM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
>> Hello Joerg,
>>
>> On 10.08.2017 01:29, Joerg Roedel wrote:
>>> From: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de>
>>>
>>> Add a struct iommu_device to each tegra-gart and register it
>>> with the iommu-core. Also link devices added to the driver
>>> to their respective hardware iommus.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/iommu/tegra-gart.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+)
>>>
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@gmail.com>
>> Tested-by: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@gmail.com>
>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/tegra-gart.c b/drivers/iommu/tegra-gart.c
>>> index 29bafc6..b62f790 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/iommu/tegra-gart.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/iommu/tegra-gart.c
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>> @@ -449,6 +472,9 @@ static int tegra_gart_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>> {
>>
>> BTW, GART's driver can't be build as a module, so this function is pretty much a
>> dead code. Probably worth considering its removal.
>
> Technically you can unbind the driver via sysfs, in which case this
> function would still be called. That said, all sorts of things will
> probably start to crash when you do that. I'd like to think that we
> will eventually be able to deal with this sanely (there's some work
> in progress to establish stronger links between devices, so that we
> can sanely deal with this kind of dependency), so I think it's okay
> to keep this around in case we ever get there.
>

Good point! I tried to unbind and with this patch kernel crashes immediately:

[ 193.968506] kernel BUG at mm/slab.c:2816!
[ 193.968912] Internal error: Oops - BUG: 0 [#1] PREEMPT SMP ARM
[ 193.969466] Modules linked in:
[ 193.969822] CPU: 1 PID: 1177 Comm: bash Not tainted
4.13.0-rc5-next-20170816-00067-gd320d19b76f8 #593
[ 193.970653] Hardware name: NVIDIA Tegra SoC (Flattened Device Tree)
[ 193.971313] task: ee31e380 task.stack: ee394000
[ 193.971771] PC is at ___cache_free+0x374/0x47c
[ 193.972261] LR is at 0x1
[ 193.972539] pc : [<c02776ec>] lr : [<00000001>] psr: 200b0093
[ 193.973112] sp : ee395dd0 ip : 00000009 fp : 00000000
[ 193.973603] r10: 00000480 r9 : 2e844000 r8 : c1814d8c
[ 193.974097] r7 : 005e4c40 r6 : c0f91fc0 r5 : ef262480 r4 : ef0003c0
[ 193.974694] r3 : ef262400 r2 : ef262000 r1 : 00000400 r0 : 00000004

[snip]

[ 193.991288] [<c02776ec>] (___cache_free) from [<c0278230>] (kfree+0xbc/0x260)
[ 193.991978] [<c0278230>] (kfree) from [<c058897c>] (device_release+0x2c/0x90)
[ 193.992732] [<c058897c>] (device_release) from [<c0ab6f14>]
(kobject_put+0x8c/0xe8)
[ 193.993474] [<c0ab6f14>] (kobject_put) from [<c0527868>]
(tegra_gart_remove+0x1c/0x58)
[ 193.994320] [<c0527868>] (tegra_gart_remove) from [<c058f770>]
(platform_drv_remove+0x24/0x3c)
[ 193.995121] [<c058f770>] (platform_drv_remove) from [<c058db30>]
(device_release_driver_internal+0x15c/0x204)
[ 193.996033] [<c058db30>] (device_release_driver_internal) from [<c058c2fc>]
(unbind_store+0x7c/0xfc)
[ 193.996890] [<c058c2fc>] (unbind_store) from [<c02f8078>]
(kernfs_fop_write+0x104/0x208)
[ 193.997661] [<c02f8078>] (kernfs_fop_write) from [<c027f6ec>]
(__vfs_write+0x1c/0x128)
[ 193.998445] [<c027f6ec>] (__vfs_write) from [<c02810b8>] (vfs_write+0xa4/0x168)
[ 194.017668] [<c02810b8>] (vfs_write) from [<c0281f0c>] (SyS_write+0x3c/0x90)
[ 194.038493] [<c0281f0c>] (SyS_write) from [<c0107ce0>]
(ret_fast_syscall+0x0/0x1c)
[ 194.057182] Code: e3a03000 ebfff54e eaffffe2 e7f001f2 (e7f001f2)

Without this patch, it crashes too after unbinding but not immediately. Either
way unbinding isn't useful for this device.

> I don't have any objections to making the driver unloadable if that
> is what everyone else prefers, though. In that case, however, there
> are more steps involved than just removing the ->remove() callback.
>
Indeed!

--
Dmitry