public inbox for linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Can Guo <cang@codeaurora.org>
To: Stanley Chu <stanley.chu@mediatek.com>
Cc: asutoshd@codeaurora.org, nguyenb@codeaurora.org,
	hongwus@codeaurora.org, rnayak@codeaurora.org,
	linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@android.com,
	saravanak@google.com, salyzyn@google.com,
	Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@samsung.com>,
	Avri Altman <avri.altman@wdc.com>,
	"James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@linux.ibm.com>,
	"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
	Bean Huo <beanhuo@micron.com>,
	Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>,
	open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] scsi: ufs: Fix unbalanced scsi_block_reqs_cnt caused by ufshcd_hold()
Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2020 18:01:01 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <09c5d4d31a0bd9bed99815cfbf51aaad@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1604387262.13152.2.camel@mtkswgap22>

On 2020-11-03 15:07, Stanley Chu wrote:
> Hi Can,
> 
> On Mon, 2020-11-02 at 22:24 -0800, Can Guo wrote:
>> The scsi_block_reqs_cnt increased in ufshcd_hold() is supposed to be
>> decreased back in ufshcd_ungate_work() in a paired way. However, if
>> specific ufshcd_hold/release sequences are met, it is possible that
>> scsi_block_reqs_cnt is increased twice but only one ungate work is
>> queued. To make sure scsi_block_reqs_cnt is handled by ufshcd_hold() 
>> and
> 
> Just curious that how could this be possible? Would you have some 
> failed
> examples?
> 

[1] One gate_work() is in the workqueue, not yet executed, now clk state 
== REQ_CLKS_OFF.
[2] ufshcd_queuecommand() calls ufshcd_hold(async == ture) -> 
active_req++ -> scsi_block_reqs_cnt++ -> REQ_CLKS_ON -> queue ungate 
work -> active_req-- -> return -EAGAIN.
[3] Now gate_work() starts to run, but since the clk state is 
REQ_CLKS_ON, gate_work() just sets clk state to CLKS_ON and bail.
[3] Someone calls ufshcd_hold(async == false) -> do something -> 
ufshcd_release() -> clk state is changed to REQ_CLKS_OFF. Note that, 
till now, ungate_work() is still in the work queue, not executed yet.
[4] Now, if someone calls ufshcd_hold(), we will hit the issue.

Above sequence is a very common clk gate/ungate sequence. The issue
is because ungate_work is queued but cannot be executed in time. In my
case, I see the ungate_work is somehow delayed for about 150ms. This
change has been tested by customers on multiple platforms. And you
can tell from the code that it won't break anything. :)

Thanks,

Can Guo.

>> ufshcd_ungate_work() in a paired way, increase it only if queue_work()
>> returns true.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Can Guo <cang@codeaurora.org>
>> Reviewed-by: Hongwu Su <hongwus@codeaurora.org>
>> ---
>>  drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c | 6 +++---
>>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
>> index 847f355..efa7d86 100644
>> --- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
>> @@ -1634,12 +1634,12 @@ int ufshcd_hold(struct ufs_hba *hba, bool 
>> async)
>>  		 */
>>  		/* fallthrough */
>>  	case CLKS_OFF:
>> -		ufshcd_scsi_block_requests(hba);
>>  		hba->clk_gating.state = REQ_CLKS_ON;
>>  		trace_ufshcd_clk_gating(dev_name(hba->dev),
>>  					hba->clk_gating.state);
>> -		queue_work(hba->clk_gating.clk_gating_workq,
>> -			   &hba->clk_gating.ungate_work);
>> +		if (queue_work(hba->clk_gating.clk_gating_workq,
>> +			       &hba->clk_gating.ungate_work))
>> +			ufshcd_scsi_block_requests(hba);
>>  		/*
>>  		 * fall through to check if we should wait for this
>>  		 * work to be done or not.
> 
> Thanks,
> Stanley Chu

  reply	other threads:[~2020-11-03 13:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-11-03  6:24 [PATCH v1 0/2] Two minor fixes for UFS driver Can Guo
2020-11-03  6:24 ` [PATCH v1 1/2] scsi: ufs: Fix unbalanced scsi_block_reqs_cnt caused by ufshcd_hold() Can Guo
2020-11-03  7:07   ` Stanley Chu
2020-11-03 10:01     ` Can Guo [this message]
2020-11-03 14:03       ` Stanley Chu
2020-11-03 15:45   ` [EXT] " Bean Huo (beanhuo)
2020-11-11 17:33   ` Asutosh Das (asd)
2020-11-03  6:24 ` [PATCH v1 2/2] scsi: ufs: Try to save power mode change and UIC cmd completion timeout Can Guo
2020-11-03  7:20   ` Stanley Chu
2020-11-03  8:01     ` Can Guo
2020-11-03 14:12       ` Stanley Chu
2020-11-03  6:24 ` [PATCH] " Can Guo
2020-11-03  6:27   ` Can Guo
2020-11-05  4:17 ` [PATCH v1 0/2] Two minor fixes for UFS driver Martin K. Petersen

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=09c5d4d31a0bd9bed99815cfbf51aaad@codeaurora.org \
    --to=cang@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=alim.akhtar@samsung.com \
    --cc=asutoshd@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=avri.altman@wdc.com \
    --cc=beanhuo@micron.com \
    --cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
    --cc=hongwus@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=jejb@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=kernel-team@android.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
    --cc=nguyenb@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=rnayak@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=salyzyn@google.com \
    --cc=saravanak@google.com \
    --cc=stanley.chu@mediatek.com \
    /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