From: David Laight <david.laight.linux@gmail.com>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@nabladev.com>
Cc: Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea@kernel.org>,
yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@renesas.com, vkoul@kernel.org,
neil.armstrong@linaro.org, geert+renesas@glider.be,
magnus.damm@gmail.com, prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com,
linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org, linux-phy@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea.uj@bp.renesas.com>,
stable@vger.kernel.org, Nobuhiro Iwamatsu <iwamatsu@nigauri.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] phy: renesas: rcar-gen3-usb2: Avoid long delay in atomic context
Date: Fri, 15 May 2026 10:47:49 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260515104749.24135f22@pumpkin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <agY8NAyCcHkhBvBv@duo.ucw.cz>
On Thu, 14 May 2026 23:18:44 +0200
Pavel Machek <pavel@nabladev.com> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > From: Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea.uj@bp.renesas.com>
> >
> > The OTG PHY initialization sequence needs to wait for 20 ms at a specific
> > step, as described in commit 72c0339c115b ("phy: renesas:
> > rcar-gen3-usb2: follow the hardware manual procedure").
> >
> > Commit 55a387ebb921 ("phy: renesas: rcar-gen3-usb2: Lock around hardware
> > registers and driver data") tried to address various problems in the
> > rcar-gen3-usb2 driver and converted the mutex protecting HW register
> > accesses to a spin lock, leaving, however, a long delay in the critical
> > section protected by the spin lock. This may become a problem,
> > especially on RT kernels.
> >
> > To address this, release the spin lock before sleeping for 20 ms as
> > required by the HW manual and reacquire it afterwards. To avoid other
> > threads entering the critical section and configuring the HW while the
> > software is waiting for the OTG initialization to complete, introduce the
> > otg_initializing variable alongside the otg_init_done completion. Any
> > other thread trying to configure the HW while the OTG PHY initialization
> > is in progress waits for the completion instead of immediately returning
> > errors to PHY users. The IRQs were also disabled while waiting for the OTG
> > PHY initialization to complete, as the interrupt handler may also apply HW
> > settings.
>
> Just... there has to be a better way.
>
> > +++ b/drivers/phy/renesas/phy-rcar-gen3-usb2.c
> > +static int rcar_gen3_phy_wait_otg_init(struct rcar_gen3_chan *channel,
> > + unsigned long *flags)
> > +{
> > + unsigned long timeout = msecs_to_jiffies(25);
> > + unsigned long ret = 1;
> > +
> > + lockdep_assert_held(&channel->lock);
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * The OTG can be initialized only once and needs to release the lock
> > + * and wait for 20 ms due to hardware constraints. Wait for the OTG PHY
> > + * initialization to complete if another PHY executes configuration
> > + * code while the OTG PHY is waiting. This avoids returning failures to
> > + * PHY users.
> > + */
> > + if (READ_ONCE(channel->otg_initializing)) {
> > + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&channel->lock, *flags);
>
> This is not nice, passing flags between functions like this is a red flag.
It would be better to just inline the code.
And I'd guess you need to redo the initial tests after re-acquiring the lock?
Or even need to do a state change/reference count before releasing the
lock to stop other threads 'doing anything nasty'.
-- David
>
> You are only accessing otg_initializing under the spinlock. That means
> that READ_ONCE is reduntant.
>
> But AFAICT spinlock is only held over this function to protect
> channel->otg_initializing access. I suspect correct answer here is
> getting rid of spinlock over this function, and using
> test_bit(BIT_INITIALIZING, ...) or something similar.
>
> Best regards,
> Pavel
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-15 9:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-14 11:13 [PATCH] phy: renesas: rcar-gen3-usb2: Avoid long delay in atomic context Claudiu Beznea
2026-05-14 21:18 ` Pavel Machek
2026-05-15 9:47 ` David Laight [this message]
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=20260515104749.24135f22@pumpkin \
--to=david.laight.linux@gmail.com \
--cc=claudiu.beznea.uj@bp.renesas.com \
--cc=claudiu.beznea@kernel.org \
--cc=geert+renesas@glider.be \
--cc=iwamatsu@nigauri.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-phy@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=magnus.damm@gmail.com \
--cc=neil.armstrong@linaro.org \
--cc=pavel@nabladev.com \
--cc=prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vkoul@kernel.org \
--cc=yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@renesas.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