From: Selvarasu Ganesan <selvarasu.g@samsung.com>
To: Thinh Nguyen <Thinh.Nguyen@synopsys.com>
Cc: "gregkh@linuxfoundation.org" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"linux-usb@vger.kernel.org" <linux-usb@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"jh0801.jung@samsung.com" <jh0801.jung@samsung.com>,
"dh10.jung@samsung.com" <dh10.jung@samsung.com>,
"naushad@samsung.com" <naushad@samsung.com>,
"akash.m5@samsung.com" <akash.m5@samsung.com>,
"rc93.raju@samsung.com" <rc93.raju@samsung.com>,
"taehyun.cho@samsung.com" <taehyun.cho@samsung.com>,
"hongpooh.kim@samsung.com" <hongpooh.kim@samsung.com>,
"eomji.oh@samsung.com" <eomji.oh@samsung.com>,
"shijie.cai@samsung.com" <shijie.cai@samsung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] usb: dwc3: Potential fix of possible dwc3 interrupt storm
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2024 11:53:25 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b48e7aba-6c54-431f-bbb5-3e5490df0c1a@samsung.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240808011536.oid627ez4ppdfkhp@synopsys.com>
On 8/8/2024 6:45 AM, Thinh Nguyen wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 07, 2024, Selvarasu Ganesan wrote:
>> On 8/7/2024 6:08 AM, Thinh Nguyen wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jul 19, 2024, Selvarasu Ganesan wrote:
>>>> In certain scenarios, there is a chance that the CPU may not be
>>>> scheduled the bottom half of dwc3 interrupt. This is because the CPU
>>>> may hang up where any work queue lockup has happened for the same CPU
>>>> that is trying to schedule the dwc3 thread interrupt. In this scenario,
>>>> the USB can enter runtime suspend as the bus may idle for a longer time
>>>> , or user can reconnect the USB cable. Then, the dwc3 event interrupt
>>>> can be enabled when runtime resume is happening with regardless of the
>>>> previous event status. This can lead to a dwc3 IRQ storm due to the
>>>> return from the interrupt handler by checking only the evt->flags as
>>>> DWC3_EVENT_PENDING, where the same flag was set as DWC3_EVENT_PENDING
>>>> in previous work queue lockup.
>>>> Let's consider the following sequences in this scenario,
>>>>
>>>> Call trace of dwc3 IRQ after workqueue lockup scenario
>>>> ======================================================
>>>> IRQ #1:
>>>> ->dwc3_interrupt()
>>>> ->dwc3_check_event_buf()
>>>> ->if (evt->flags & DWC3_EVENT_PENDING)
>>>> return IRQ_HANDLED;
>>>> ->evt->flags |= DWC3_EVENT_PENDING;
>>>> ->/* Disable interrupt by setting DWC3_GEVNTSIZ_INTMASK in
>>>> DWC3_GEVNTSIZ
>>>> ->return IRQ_WAKE_THREAD; // No workqueue scheduled for dwc3
>>>> thread_fu due to workqueue lockup
>>>> even after return IRQ_WAKE_THREAD
>>>> from top-half.
>>>>
>>>> Thread #2:
>>>> ->dwc3_runtime_resume()
>>>> ->dwc3_resume_common()
>>>> ->dwc3_gadget_resume()
>>>> ->dwc3_gadget_soft_connect()
>>>> ->dwc3_event_buffers_setup()
>>>> ->/*Enable interrupt by clearing DWC3_GEVNTSIZ_INTMASK in
>>>> DWC3_GEVNTSIZ*/
>>>>
>>>> Start IRQ Storming after enable dwc3 event in resume path
>>>> =========================================================
>>>> CPU0: IRQ
>>>> dwc3_interrupt()
>>>> dwc3_check_event_buf()
>>>> if (evt->flags & DWC3_EVENT_PENDING)
>>>> return IRQ_HANDLED;
>>>>
>>>> CPU0: IRQ
>>>> dwc3_interrupt()
>>>> dwc3_check_event_buf()
>>>> if (evt->flags & DWC3_EVENT_PENDING)
>>>> return IRQ_HANDLED;
>>>> ..
>>>> ..
>>>>
>>>> To fix this issue by avoiding enabling of the dwc3 event interrupt in
>>>> the runtime resume path if dwc3 event processing is in progress.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Selvarasu Ganesan <selvarasu.g@samsung.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/usb/dwc3/core.c | 8 ++++++--
>>>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/usb/dwc3/core.c b/drivers/usb/dwc3/core.c
>>>> index cb82557678dd..610792a70805 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/usb/dwc3/core.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/usb/dwc3/core.c
>>>> @@ -549,8 +549,12 @@ int dwc3_event_buffers_setup(struct dwc3 *dwc)
>>>> lower_32_bits(evt->dma));
>>>> dwc3_writel(dwc->regs, DWC3_GEVNTADRHI(0),
>>>> upper_32_bits(evt->dma));
>>>> - dwc3_writel(dwc->regs, DWC3_GEVNTSIZ(0),
>>>> - DWC3_GEVNTSIZ_SIZE(evt->length));
>>>> +
>>>> + /* Skip enable dwc3 event interrupt if event is processing in middle */
>>>> + if (!(evt->flags & DWC3_EVENT_PENDING))
>>>> + dwc3_writel(dwc->regs, DWC3_GEVNTSIZ(0),
>>>> + DWC3_GEVNTSIZ_SIZE(evt->length));
>>>> +
>>>> dwc3_writel(dwc->regs, DWC3_GEVNTCOUNT(0), 0);
>>>>
>>>> return 0;
>>>> --
>>>> 2.17.1
>>>>
>>> We're not waking up from a hibernation. So after a soft-reset and
>>> resume, the events that weren't processed are stale. They should be
>>> processed prior to entering suspend or be discarded before resume.
>>>
>>> The synchronize_irq() during suspend() was not sufficient to prevent
>>> this? What are we missing here.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Thinh
>> I don’t think the triggering of interrupt would not be stopped even if
>> do soft reset. It's because of event count is may be valid .
> Ok. I think I see what you're referring to when you say "event is
> processing in the middle" now.
>
> What you want to check is probably this in dwc3_event_buffers_setup().
> Please confirm:
>
> if (dwc->pending_events)
> dwc3_writel(dwc->regs, DWC3_GEVNTSIZ(0),
> DWC3_GEVNTSIZ_INTMASK | DWC3_GEVNTSIZ_SIZE(evt->length));
> else
> dwc3_writel(dwc->regs, DWC3_GEVNTSIZ(0), DWC3_GEVNTSIZ_SIZE(evt->length));
Yes, we are expecting the same. But, we must verify the status of
evt->flags, which will indicate whether the event is currently
processing in middle or not. The below code is for the reference.
if (!(evt->flags & DWC3_EVENT_PENDING))
dwc3_writel(dwc->regs, DWC3_GEVNTSIZ(0),
DWC3_GEVNTSIZ_SIZE(evt->length));
else
dwc3_writel(dwc->regs, DWC3_GEVNTSIZ(0),
DWC3_GEVNTSIZ_INTMASK | DWC3_GEVNTSIZ_SIZE(evt->length));
>> Let consider the scenarios where SW is not acknowledge the event count
>> after getting a interrupt with disable GEVNTSIZ_INTMASK =0. It will
>> triggering the spurious interrupts until enable GEVNTSIZ_INTMASK=1 or
>> acknowledge the event count by SW. This is happening here because of We
>> just return from interrupt handler by checking if evt->flags as
>> DWC3_EVENT_PENDING. Clearing of DWC3_EVENT_PENDING flag is done in
>> dwc3_thread_interrupt. In some scenario it's not happening due to cpu
>> hangup or work queue lockup.
> This can be mitigated by adjusting the imod_interval (interrupt
> moderation). Have you tried that?
Yes we tried to play around the changing of imod interval value but no
improvements.
>
> Thanks,
> Thinh
>
>> The same issue was reported earlier and not derived actual root cause
>> from USB dwc3 driver point of view, and somehow we managing fix with our
>> vendor kernel by using kretprobe.
>>
>> To fix this issue, We have to reset the evt->flags or stop disable
>> GEVNTSIZ_INTMASK=0
>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lore.kernel.org/linux-usb/20230102050831.105499-1-jh0801.jung@samsung.com/__;!!A4F2R9G_pg!b0Uj7NvYzWqrvNKOrkkXaY-g4Uaso-pW520AY2fBdlqmJeudUnmdsgpnL1YxAZaw2ydyg2M-XzhetbCraKxJa5C3NBQ$
>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lore.kernel.org/linux-usb/1646630679-121585-1-git-send-email-jh0801.jung@samsung.com/__;!!A4F2R9G_pg!b0Uj7NvYzWqrvNKOrkkXaY-g4Uaso-pW520AY2fBdlqmJeudUnmdsgpnL1YxAZaw2ydyg2M-XzhetbCraKxJ2d2qDqA$
>>
> Thanks,
> Thinh
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-08-08 6:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CGME20240719110149epcas5p3dd468685a095c094ed2e540279bf3ec2@epcas5p3.samsung.com>
2024-07-19 11:00 ` [PATCH] usb: dwc3: Potential fix of possible dwc3 interrupt storm Selvarasu Ganesan
2024-08-07 0:38 ` Thinh Nguyen
2024-08-07 6:20 ` Selvarasu Ganesan
2024-08-08 1:15 ` Thinh Nguyen
2024-08-08 6:23 ` Selvarasu Ganesan [this message]
2024-08-09 23:42 ` Thinh Nguyen
2024-08-09 23:45 ` Thinh Nguyen
2024-08-10 15:14 ` Selvarasu Ganesan
2024-08-30 12:16 ` Selvarasu Ganesan
2024-08-31 0:50 ` Thinh Nguyen
2024-09-02 11:27 ` Selvarasu Ganesan
2024-09-03 23:41 ` Thinh Nguyen
2024-09-04 1:03 ` Thinh Nguyen
2024-09-04 15:50 ` Selvarasu Ganesan
2024-09-05 0:26 ` Thinh Nguyen
2024-09-05 13:19 ` Selvarasu Ganesan
2024-09-05 21:13 ` Thinh Nguyen
2024-09-05 23:05 ` Selvarasu Ganesan
2024-09-05 23:18 ` Thinh Nguyen
2024-09-06 0:28 ` Selvarasu Ganesan
2024-09-06 0:59 ` Thinh Nguyen
2024-09-06 19:02 ` Selvarasu Ganesan
2024-09-07 0:39 ` Thinh Nguyen
2024-09-10 13:37 ` Selvarasu Ganesan
2024-09-11 0:24 ` Thinh Nguyen
2024-09-13 12:42 ` Selvarasu Ganesan
2024-09-13 17:51 ` Thinh Nguyen
2024-09-13 18:00 ` Thinh Nguyen
2024-09-16 12:43 ` Selvarasu Ganesan
2024-09-16 21:19 ` Thinh Nguyen
2024-09-16 12:41 ` Selvarasu Ganesan
2024-09-16 21:18 ` Thinh Nguyen
2024-09-16 22:54 ` Selvarasu Ganesan
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=b48e7aba-6c54-431f-bbb5-3e5490df0c1a@samsung.com \
--to=selvarasu.g@samsung.com \
--cc=Thinh.Nguyen@synopsys.com \
--cc=akash.m5@samsung.com \
--cc=dh10.jung@samsung.com \
--cc=eomji.oh@samsung.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=hongpooh.kim@samsung.com \
--cc=jh0801.jung@samsung.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-usb@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=naushad@samsung.com \
--cc=rc93.raju@samsung.com \
--cc=shijie.cai@samsung.com \
--cc=taehyun.cho@samsung.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