public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Stephan Gerhold <stephan.gerhold@linaro.org>
To: Jingyi Wang <jingyi.wang@oss.qualcomm.com>
Cc: Bjorn Andersson <andersson@kernel.org>,
	Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>,
	aiqun.yu@oss.qualcomm.com, tingwei.zhang@oss.qualcomm.com,
	trilok.soni@oss.qualcomm.com, yijie.yang@oss.qualcomm.com,
	linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
	Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@kernel.org>,
	Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@oss.qualcomm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] remoteproc: core: Attach rproc asynchronously in rproc_add() path
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2026 16:28:01 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <adkI8Si4ejf6T73T@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260409-rproc-attach-issue-v1-1-088a1c348e7a@oss.qualcomm.com>

+Cc Bartosz, Dmitry

On Thu, Apr 09, 2026 at 01:46:21AM -0700, Jingyi Wang wrote:
> For rproc with state RPROC_DETACHED and auto_boot enabled, the attach
> callback will be called in the rproc_add()->rproc_trigger_auto_boot()->
> rproc_boot() path, the failure in this path will cause the rproc_add()
> fail and the resource release, which will cause issue like rproc recovery
> or falling back to firmware load fail. Add attach_work for rproc and call
> it asynchronously in rproc_add() path like what rproc_start() do.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jingyi Wang <jingyi.wang@oss.qualcomm.com>
> ---
>  drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 20 ++++++++++++--------
>  include/linux/remoteproc.h           |  1 +
>  2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> index b087ed21858a..f02db1113fae 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> @@ -1673,18 +1673,21 @@ static void rproc_auto_boot_callback(const struct firmware *fw, void *context)
>  	release_firmware(fw);
>  }
>  
> +static void rproc_attach_work(struct work_struct *work)
> +{
> +	struct rproc *rproc = container_of(work, struct rproc, attach_work);
> +
> +	rproc_boot(rproc);
> +}
> +
>  static int rproc_trigger_auto_boot(struct rproc *rproc)
>  {
>  	int ret;
>  
> -	/*
> -	 * Since the remote processor is in a detached state, it has already
> -	 * been booted by another entity.  As such there is no point in waiting
> -	 * for a firmware image to be loaded, we can simply initiate the process
> -	 * of attaching to it immediately.
> -	 */
> -	if (rproc->state == RPROC_DETACHED)
> -		return rproc_boot(rproc);
> +	if (rproc->state == RPROC_DETACHED) {
> +		schedule_work(&rproc->attach_work);
> +		return 0;
> +	}

I think the change itself is reasonable to make "auto-attach" behavior
consistent with "auto-boot". The commit message is a bit misleading
though:

 - You're really doing two separate functional changes here:

   (1) Ignore the return value of rproc_boot() during auto-boot attach,
       to keep the remoteproc registered and available in sysfs even if
       attaching fails.
   (2) Run the rproc_boot() in the background using schedule_work().
       [To improve boot performance? To work around some locking issues?]

 - The actual issue you are seeing sounds like a use-after-free in the
   remoteproc core error cleanup path. I think this one is still
   present, we should really have a call to
   cancel_work_sync(&rproc->crash_handler) as Dmitry wrote in the
   previous discussion [1].

Thanks,
Stephan

[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/ce24a2sgg4b6wymoxwgl2ve6np2nxn2wuxfqxfpmvqqrpvgouf@xihd6ziqwu4m/

  reply	other threads:[~2026-04-10 14:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-04-09  8:46 [PATCH 0/2] remoteproc: improve robustness for rproc_attach fail cases Jingyi Wang
2026-04-09  8:46 ` [PATCH 1/2] remoteproc: core: Attach rproc asynchronously in rproc_add() path Jingyi Wang
2026-04-10 14:28   ` Stephan Gerhold [this message]
2026-04-09  8:46 ` [PATCH 2/2] remoteproc: qcom: Check glink->edge in glink_subdev_stop() Jingyi Wang
2026-04-10 14:15   ` Stephan Gerhold

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=adkI8Si4ejf6T73T@linaro.org \
    --to=stephan.gerhold@linaro.org \
    --cc=aiqun.yu@oss.qualcomm.com \
    --cc=andersson@kernel.org \
    --cc=brgl@kernel.org \
    --cc=dmitry.baryshkov@oss.qualcomm.com \
    --cc=jingyi.wang@oss.qualcomm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mathieu.poirier@linaro.org \
    --cc=tingwei.zhang@oss.qualcomm.com \
    --cc=trilok.soni@oss.qualcomm.com \
    --cc=yijie.yang@oss.qualcomm.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