From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
To: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
Cc: sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Andreas Larsson <andreas@gaisler.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sparc/pci: Make pci_poke_lock a raw_spinlock_t.
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2024 18:43:36 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20241125174336.8nEhFXIw@linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b776ca37-d51c-47e2-b3bb-aee8e7910630@roeck-us.net>
On 2024-11-25 09:01:33 [-0800], Guenter Roeck wrote:
> Unfortunately it doesn't make a difference.
stunning. It looks like the exact same error message.
> [ 1.050499] =============================
> [ 1.050801] [ BUG: Invalid wait context ]
> [ 1.051200] 6.12.0+ #1 Not tainted
> [ 1.051571] -----------------------------
> [ 1.051875] swapper/0/1 is trying to lock:
> [ 1.052201] 0000000001b694c8 (pci_poke_lock){....}-{3:3}, at: pci_config_read16+0x8/0x80
> [ 1.052994] other info that might help us debug this:
> [ 1.053331] context-{5:5}
> [ 1.053641] 2 locks held by swapper/0/1:
> [ 1.053959] #0: fffff800042b50f8 (&dev->mutex){....}-{4:4}, at: __driver_attach+0x80/0x160
> [ 1.054388] #1: 0000000001d29078 (pci_lock){....}-{2:2}, at: pci_bus_read_config_word+0x18/0x80
> [ 1.054793] stack backtrace:
> [ 1.055171] CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 1 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 6.12.0+ #1
> [ 1.055632] Call Trace:
> [ 1.055985] [<00000000004e31d0>] __lock_acquire+0xa50/0x3160
> [ 1.056329] [<00000000004e63e8>] lock_acquire+0xe8/0x340
> [ 1.056645] [<00000000010f0dfc>] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x3c/0x80
> [ 1.056966] [<0000000000443828>] pci_config_read16+0x8/0x80
> [ 1.057278] [<000000000044442c>] sun4u_read_pci_cfg+0x12c/0x1a0
> [ 1.057593] [<0000000000b7657c>] pci_bus_read_config_word+0x3c/0x80
> [ 1.057913] [<0000000000b7fa78>] pci_find_capability+0x18/0xa0
> [ 1.058228] [<0000000000b794b0>] set_pcie_port_type+0x10/0x160
> [ 1.058543] [<0000000000442a98>] pci_of_scan_bus+0x158/0xb00
> [ 1.058854] [<00000000010c74a0>] pci_scan_one_pbm+0xd0/0xf8
> [ 1.059167] [<0000000000446174>] sabre_probe+0x1f4/0x5c0
> [ 1.059476] [<0000000000c13a48>] platform_probe+0x28/0x80
> [ 1.059785] [<0000000000c11158>] really_probe+0xb8/0x340
> [ 1.060098] [<0000000000c11584>] driver_probe_device+0x24/0xe0
> [ 1.060413] [<0000000000c117ac>] __driver_attach+0x8c/0x160
> [ 1.060728] [<0000000000c0ef54>] bus_for_each_dev+0x54/0xc0
>
> The original call trace also included _raw_spin_lock_irqsave(), and
> I don't have CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT enabled in my sparc64 builds to start with.
You don't have to. "CONFIG_PROVE_RAW_LOCK_NESTING" looks if you try to
acquire raw_spinlock_t -> spinlock_t. Which it did before I made the
patch.
The pci_lock is from drivers/pci/access.c and is defined as
raw_spinlock_t. And I made pci_poke_lock of the same time. But debug
says 3:3 which suggests LD_WAIT_CONFIG. (No patch applied).
> FWIW, I don't understand the value of
> pr_warn("context-{%d:%d}\n", curr_inner, curr_inner);
> Why print curr_inner twice ?
The syntax was once (or is) inner:outer. If you look from the top, you
have 4 (mutex_t) followed pci_lock (the raw_spinlock_t) 2. You are at
level 2 now and try to acquire spin_lock_t (3).
> Thanks,
> Guenter
Sebastian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-11-25 17:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20241009161041.1018375-1-bigeasy@linutronix.de>
[not found] ` <20241009161041.1018375-2-bigeasy@linutronix.de>
[not found] ` <7656395b-58fc-4874-a9f3-6d934e2ef7ee@roeck-us.net>
2024-11-25 8:53 ` [PATCH] sparc/pci: Make pci_poke_lock a raw_spinlock_t Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2024-11-25 17:01 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-11-25 17:43 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior [this message]
2024-11-25 17:59 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-11-25 18:12 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2024-11-25 19:23 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-11-25 19:33 ` Waiman Long
2024-11-25 20:06 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-11-25 20:23 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-11-25 20:54 ` Waiman Long
2024-11-25 21:25 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-11-25 21:29 ` Waiman Long
2024-11-25 21:54 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-11-25 22:33 ` Waiman Long
2024-11-26 11:20 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2024-11-26 16:59 ` Waiman Long
2024-11-27 15:39 ` Andreas Larsson
2024-11-27 16:02 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-11-27 16:53 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2024-11-27 17:44 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-11-27 23:47 ` Waiman Long
2024-11-28 0:08 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-11-28 0:31 ` Waiman Long
2024-11-28 1:17 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-11-28 1:55 ` Waiman Long
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=20241125174336.8nEhFXIw@linutronix.de \
--to=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=andreas@gaisler.com \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=sparclinux@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=will@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).