[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAE9FiQX2nobvu0Pm4KLo24QwOE7Ped91aQ905HkYyTAKj=ifKg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 22:28:43 -0700
From: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
Cc: Andreas Noever <andreas.noever@...il.com>,
Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [3.11.4] Thunderbolt/PCI unplug oops in pci_pme_list_scan
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 10:13 PM, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 8:33 PM, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>> Bisection points to 928bea964827d7824b548c1f8e06eccbbc4d0d7d .
>>>>
>>>> This is "PCI: Delay enabling bridges until they're needed" by Yinghai.
>>>
>>> that double disabling should be addressed by:
>>>
>>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/4/25/608
>>>
>>> [PATCH] PCI: Remove duplicate pci_disable_device for pcie port
>>
>> I'll look at that patch again. I had some questions about it the
>> first time, but perhaps it makes more sense after 928bea9648 has been
>> applied.
>>
>> Andreas originally reported a GPF oops in pci_pme_list_scan(). I
>> posted a refcounting patch, which made the problem go away, but I
>> can't explain why, and I don't want to apply it without understanding
>> that. Decoding his oops shows this:
>>
>> 24: 0f 1f 00 nopl (%rax)
>> 27: 48 8b 50 10 mov 0x10(%rax),%rdx
>> 2b:* 48 8b 52 38 mov 0x38(%rdx),%rdx <-- trapping instruction
>> 2f: 48 85 d2 test %rdx,%rdx
>>
>> %rax is the pci_dev pointer, so 0x10(%rax) is the dev->bus pointer,
>> which we put in %rdx. The oops says %rdx = 6b6b6b6b6b6b6b6b, which is
>> POISON_FREE, so I think we loaded dev->bus out of a struct pci_dev
>> that has already been freed.
>>
>> pci_pme_list_scan() holds pci_pme_list_mutex while it traverses
>> pci_pme_list, and the pci_stop_and_remove_bus_device() path removes
>> the pci_dev by calling pci_pme_active(), which also holds
>> pci_pme_list_mutex, so I don't understand how pci_pme_list_scan() can
>> see a pci_dev that has already been freed.
>>
>> If I understand Andreas correctly, 928bea9648 also fixes the crash,
>> even without my refcounting change. Can you explain why?
>
> 928bea will make the dev->enable_cnt increase wrongly, as we have
> pci_enable_device for child
> pci_enable_bridge for parent
> pci_enable_bridge for grandparent
> pci_enable_device for grandparent
> pci_enable_device for parent
> pci_enable_brdige for grandparent
> pci_enable_device for grandparent. ===> looks like i read the code wrongly. This one is skipped as we have pci_is_enabled checking.
928bea delay bridge enabling, and it's pci_is_enabled checking will prevent
pci bridge get enabled second time, so enable_cnt will be only 1. instead of
2. if we enable bridge at first and then pcie port driver.
Yinghai
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists