public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PM / QoS: Fix workqueue deadlock when using pm_qos_update_request_timeout()
Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2013 09:46:26 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <520A62E2.6000309@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130813164315.GB32719@htj.dyndns.org>

On 08/13/13 09:43, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Stephen.
>
> On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 01:13:57PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>> pm_qos_update_request_timeout() updates a qos and then schedules
>> a delayed work item to bring the qos back down to the default
>> after the timeout. When the work item runs, pm_qos_work_fn() will
>> call pm_qos_update_request() and deadlock because it tries to
>> cancel itself via cancel_delayed_work_sync(). Future callers of
>> that qos will also hang waiting to cancel the work that is
>> canceling itself. Before ed1ac6e (PM: don't use
>> [delayed_]work_pending(), 2013-01-11) this didn't happen because
>> the work function wouldn't try to cancel itself.
> I see.  That must have been racy tho.  If the work item execution
> races someone else queuing the work item, the same deadlock could
> happen, right?

Yes you're right. It was always racy.

>
>> Let's just do the little bit of pm_qos_update_request() here so
>> that we don't deadlock.
>>
>> Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>
>> ---
>>  kernel/power/qos.c | 6 +++++-
>>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/power/qos.c b/kernel/power/qos.c
>> index 06fe285..d52d314 100644
>> --- a/kernel/power/qos.c
>> +++ b/kernel/power/qos.c
>> @@ -308,7 +308,11 @@ static void pm_qos_work_fn(struct work_struct *work)
>>  						  struct pm_qos_request,
>>  						  work);
>>  
>> -	pm_qos_update_request(req, PM_QOS_DEFAULT_VALUE);
>> +	if (PM_QOS_DEFAULT_VALUE != req->node.prio)
>> +		pm_qos_update_target(
>> +				pm_qos_array[req->pm_qos_class]->constraints,
>> +				&req->node, PM_QOS_UPDATE_REQ,
>> +				PM_QOS_DEFAULT_VALUE);
> Maybe it'd be cleaner to add a param or internal variant of
> pm_qos_update_request()?

Maybe, but I was trying to make a minimal fix here.

-- 
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation


  reply	other threads:[~2013-08-13 16:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-08-08 20:13 [PATCH] PM / QoS: Fix workqueue deadlock when using pm_qos_update_request_timeout() Stephen Boyd
2013-08-13 16:37 ` Stephen Boyd
2013-08-13 16:43 ` Tejun Heo
2013-08-13 16:46   ` Stephen Boyd [this message]
2013-08-13 17:01     ` Tejun Heo
2013-08-13 20:49       ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-08-13 20:49         ` Stephen Boyd
2013-08-13 21:12         ` Stephen Boyd
2013-08-13 22:13           ` Tejun Heo
2013-08-13 22:54             ` Rafael J. Wysocki

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=520A62E2.6000309@codeaurora.org \
    --to=sboyd@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
    --cc=tj@kernel.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