Re: USB OOPS 2.6.25-rc2-git1

[David Brownell <david-b@pacbell.net>]

On Wednesday 20 February 2008, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Feb 2008, David Brownell wrote:
> 
> > On Wednesday 20 February 2008, Alan Stern wrote:
> > > > ehci_hcd 0000:00:1d.7: IAA watchdog, lost IAA: status 8029 cmd 10021
> > > 
> > > lines in the log brings up some ideas that have been percolating in my 
> > > mind for a while.  They have to do with the possibility of a race 
> > > between the watchdog routine and assertion of IAA.
> > 
> > The curious bit IMO being STS_INT (0001), which should also have
> > triggered an IRQ.  Suggesting to me that the race might be lower
> > level than that ... at the level of a conflict between the various
> > mechanisms to ack irqs.
> 
> Maybe it did trigger an IRQ.  Inside the watchdog routine interrupts 
> are disabled.
> 
> > > In fact, if the timing comes out just wrong then it's possible (on SMP
> > > systems) for an IAA interrupt to arrive when the watchdog
> > > routine has already started running.  Then end_unlink_async() might get 
> > > called right at the start of a new IAA cycle, or when the reclaim list 
> > > is empty.
> > 
> > The driver's spinlock should prevent that particular problem from
> > appearing.
> 
> I don't think so:
> 
> 	CPU 0				CPU 1
> 	-----				-----
> 	Watchdog timer expires
> 	Timer routine acquires spinlock
> 					IAA IRQ arrives
> 					ehci_irq tries to acquire 
> 						spinlock...

There's another condition here, and
another action.  The condition is
that ehci->reclaim must first be set;
the action is to clear STS_IAA (and,
given the previous patch, maybe IAAD).

And this "either" is more concisely
written as "call end_unlink_async()"
(point made just for clarity).

> 	Timer routine either sets
> 		ehci->reclaim to NULL 
> 		or else starts a new
> 		IAA cycle
> 	Timer routine releases spinlock
> 		and returns
> 					ehci_irq acquires spinlock
> 						and sees IAA is set

					Can only happen if a new IAA
					cycle was started by CPU0, and
					the IAA condition triggered
					that quickly.

> 					Call end_unlink_async()!
>