Re: [PATCH] mmc: don't request CD IRQ until mmc_start_host()

Adrian Hunter
2014-09-18T06:50:54Z

On 09/18/2014 08:25 AM, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> On 09/17/2014 10:57 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> On 09/17/2014 01:55 PM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>>> On 12 September 2014 19:18, Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org> wrote:
>>>> From: Stephen Warren <swarren@nvidia.com>
>>>>
>>>> As soon as the CD IRQ is requested, it can trigger, since it's an
>>>> externally controlled event. If it does, delayed_work host->detect will
>>>> be scheduled.
>>>>
>>>> Many host controller probe()s are roughly structured as:
>>>>
>>>> *_probe() {
>>>> host = sdhci_pltfm_init();
>>>> mmc_of_parse(host->mmc);
>>>> rc = sdhci_add_host(host);
>>>> if (rc) {
>>>> sdhci_pltfm_free();
>>>> return rc;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> In 3.17, CD IRQs can are enabled quite early via *_probe() ->
>>>> mmc_of_parse() -> mmc_gpio_request_cd() -> mmc_gpiod_request_cd_irq().
>>>>
>>>> Note that in linux-next, mmc_of_parse() calls mmc_gpio*d*_request_cd()
>>>> rather than mmc_gpio_request_cd(), and mmc_gpio*d*_request_cd() doesn't
>>>> call mmc_gpiod_request_cd_irq(). However, this issue still exists for
>>>> any other direct users of mmc_gpio_request_cd().
>>>>
>>>> sdhci_add_host() may fail part way through (e.g. due to deferred
>>>> probe for a vmmc regulator), and sdhci_pltfm_free() does nothing to
>>>> unrequest the CD IRQ nor cancel the delayed_work. sdhci_pltfm_free() is
>>>> coded to assume that if sdhci_add_host() failed, then the delayed_work
>>>> cannot (or should not) have been triggered.
>>>>
>>>> This can lead to the following with CONFIG_DEBUG_OBJECTS_* enabled, when
>>>> kfree(host) is eventually called inside sdhci_pltfm_free():
>>>>
>>>> WARNING: CPU: 2 PID: 6 at lib/debugobjects.c:263
>>>> debug_print_object+0x8c/0xb4()
>>>> ODEBUG: free active (active state 0) object type: timer_list hint:
>>>> delayed_work_timer_fn+0x0/0x18
>>>>
>>>> The object being complained about is host->detect.
>>>>
>>>> There's no need to request the CD IRQ so early; mmc_start_host() already
>>>> requests it, and I *assume* that mmc_start_host() is called somehow for
>>>> all host controllers. For SDHCI hosts at least, the typical call path
>>>> that does this is: *_probe() -> sdhci_add_host() -> mmc_add_host() ->
>>>> mmc_start_host(). So, remove the call to mmc_gpiod_request_cd_irq() from
>>>> mmc_gpio_request_cd(). This matches mmc_gpio*d*_request_cd(), which
>>>> already doesn't call mmc_gpiod_request_cd_irq().
>>>>
>>>> This solves the problem (eliminates the kernel error message above),
>>>> since it guarantees that the IRQ can't trigger before mmc_start_host()
>>>> is called.
>>>>
>>>> The critical point here is that once sdhci_add_host() calls
>>>> mmc_add_host() -> mmc_start_host(), sdhci_add_host() is coded not to
>>>> fail. In other words, if there's a chance that mmc_start_host() may have
>>>> been called, and CD IRQs triggered, and the delayed_work scheduled,
>>>> sdhci_add_host() won't fail, and so cleanup is no longer via
>>>> sdhci_pltfm_free() (which doesn't free the IRQ or cancel the work queue)
>>>> but instead must be via sdhci_remove_host(), which calls mmc_remove_host()
>>>> -> mmc_stop_host(), which does free the IRQ and cancel the work queue.
>>>>
>>>> This fixes what I might conclude to be a mistake in commit 740a221ef0e5
>>>> ("mmc: slot-gpio: Add GPIO descriptor based CD GPIO API"), which added the
>>>> call from mmc_start_host() to mmc_gpiod_request_cd_irq(), but also added
>>>> incorrectly added a call from mmc_gpio_request_cd() to
>>>> mmc_gpiod_request_cd_irq().

That comment is wrong. mmc_gpio_request_cd() has always set up the irq.

>>>>
>>>> CC: Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
>>>> Cc: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
>>>> Cc: Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@nvidia.com>
>>>> Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Stephen Warren <swarren@nvidia.com>
>>>
>>> Hi Stephen,
>>>
>>> Thanks for looking into this. It seems like this issue has been
>>> present for quite a while.
>>> I believe your patch should have a stable tag for 3.15+ as well,
>>> unless you object I will add it.
>>
>> Yes, that probably makes sense, thanks.
>
> Doesn't this patch break the drivers that call mmc_gpio_request_cd() after
> mmc_add_host() like mmc_spi.c or sdhci-sirf.c or tmio_mmc_pio.c ?

Ulf, this should be reverted.