From: Stanley Chu <stanley.chu-NuS5LvNUpcJWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
To: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche-HInyCGIudOg@public.gmane.org>
Cc: linux-scsi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
kuohong.wang-NuS5LvNUpcJWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org,
wsdupstream-NuS5LvNUpcJWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org,
linux-mediatek-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org,
peter.wang-NuS5LvNUpcJWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org,
matthias.bgg-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org,
mika.westerberg-VuQAYsv1563Yd54FQh9/CA@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] scsi: Synchronize request queue PM status only on successful resume
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2019 14:38:47 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1546497527.20657.12.camel@mtkswgap22> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1546445745.163063.4.camel-HInyCGIudOg@public.gmane.org>
Hi Bart,
On Wed, 2019-01-02 at 08:15 -0800, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On Wed, 2019-01-02 at 14:25 +0800, stanley.chu-NuS5LvNUpcJWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org wrote:
> > From: Stanley Chu <stanley.chu-NuS5LvNUpcJWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
> >
> > The commit 356fd2663cff ("scsi: Set request queue runtime PM status
> > back to active on resume") fixed up the inconsistent RPM status between
> > request queue and device. However changing request queue RPM status
> > shall be done only on successful resume, otherwise status may be still
> > inconsistent as below,
> >
> > Request queue: RPM_ACTIVE
> > Device: RPM_SUSPENDED
> >
> > This ends up soft lockup because requests can be submitted to
> > underlying devices but those devices and their required resource
> > are not resumed.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Stanley Chu <stanley.chu-NuS5LvNUpcJWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
>
> Please add "Fixes:" and "Cc: stable" tags and also Cc the author of commit
> 356fd2663cff.
Sure. Thanks for remind.
>
>
> > ---
> > drivers/scsi/scsi_pm.c | 24 ++++++++++++++----------
> > 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_pm.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_pm.c
> > index a2b4179..eff3e59 100644
> > --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_pm.c
> > +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_pm.c
> > @@ -82,6 +82,20 @@ static int scsi_dev_type_resume(struct device *dev,
> > pm_runtime_disable(dev);
> > pm_runtime_set_active(dev);
> > pm_runtime_enable(dev);
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * Forcibly set runtime PM status of request queue to "active"
> > + * to make sure we can again get requests from the queue
> > + * (see also blk_pm_peek_request()).
> > + *
> > + * The resume hook will correct runtime PM status of the disk.
> > + */
> > + if (!err && scsi_is_sdev_device(dev)) {
> > + struct scsi_device *sdev = to_scsi_device(dev);
> > +
> > + if (sdev->request_queue->dev)
> > + blk_set_runtime_active(sdev->request_queue);
> > + }
>
> What makes you think that the sdev->request_queue->dev test is necessary? The
> scsi_dev_type_resume() function is only called after blk_pm_runtime_init() has
> finished so I don't think that test is necessary.
We found NULL sdev->request_queue->dev may be dereferenced during below
system resume flow,
scsi_bus_resume_common()
=> async_schedule_domain(async_sdev_resume)
And then async_sdev_resume() is invoked asynchronously,
async_sdev_resume()
=> scsi_dev_type_resume(dev, do_scsi_resume)
=> blk_set_runtime_active(sdev->request_queue)
If a SCSI device does not have upper layer driver (like SCSI disk), it
may not be applied blk_pm_runtime_init() invoked by sd_probe() while
this SCSI device is added.
For example, some SCSI devices (like UFS Boot W-LUN) are added
explicitly in __scsi_add_device() by ufshcd_scsi_add_wlus() first and
thus sd_probe() for them is skipped because they are already visible.
For those SCSI devices, null sdev->request_queue->dev will be
dereferenced in blk_set_runtime_active() during above system resume
flow, therefore we add a null pointer checking for this case.
The same issue also happens on those SCSI devices before this patch as
below system resume flow while devices are already runtime-suspended.
scsi_bus_resume_common()
=> blk_set_runtime_active(to_scsi_device(dev)->request_queue)
>
> Additionally, since the above code occurs inside a block controlled by an
> "if (err == 0)" statement, I think the !err test is redundant and should be
> left out.
Sorry this is my code merge defect.
"err" here shall be returned value from pm_runtime_set_active().
I will fix it in v2.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bart.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-mediatek mailing list
> Linux-mediatek-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mediatek
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-01-03 6:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1546410308-13486-1-git-send-email-stanley.chu@mediatek.com>
[not found] ` <1546410308-13486-3-git-send-email-stanley.chu@mediatek.com>
[not found] ` <1546410308-13486-3-git-send-email-stanley.chu-NuS5LvNUpcJWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
2019-01-02 16:15 ` [PATCH v1 1/1] scsi: Synchronize request queue PM status only on successful resume Bart Van Assche
[not found] ` <1546445745.163063.4.camel-HInyCGIudOg@public.gmane.org>
2019-01-03 6:38 ` Stanley Chu [this message]
2019-01-03 23:15 ` Bart Van Assche
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=1546497527.20657.12.camel@mtkswgap22 \
--to=stanley.chu-nus5lvnupcjwk0htik3j/w@public.gmane.org \
--cc=bvanassche-HInyCGIudOg@public.gmane.org \
--cc=kuohong.wang-NuS5LvNUpcJWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-mediatek-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-scsi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=matthias.bgg-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org \
--cc=mika.westerberg-VuQAYsv1563Yd54FQh9/CA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=peter.wang-NuS5LvNUpcJWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org \
--cc=wsdupstream-NuS5LvNUpcJWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.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