[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALAqxLXpZV87dMSMqwMR-1Z6Czc2+c=eEXFX0DYLqTdzD+w7Fw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 00:13:25 -0700
From: John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
To: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
Cc: Guodong Xu <guodong.xu@...aro.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Zhangfei Gao <zhangfei.gao@...aro.org>,
Shawn Lin <shawn.lin@...k-chips.com>,
Jaehoon Chung <jh80.chung@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 1271 at drivers/mmc/core/core.c:991 mmc_release_host+0xa0/0xa8
On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 9:52 PM, John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org> wrote:
> Hey Ulf,
> Since moving my HiKey branch to pre-v4.8-rc1 (linus's HEAD), I've
> been seeing the following warning occasionally. Usually after seeing
> it, the system will refuse to reboot (system does the "Emergency
> remount complete" but then just sits there, and if I ctrl-c I can use
> the shell fine but many commands will get me stuck).
>
> Anyway, if you have any ideas...
>
> thanks
> -john
>
> [ 24.154245] ------------[ cut here ]------------
> [ 24.158903] WARNING: CPU: 2 PID: 1273 at
> drivers/mmc/core/core.c:991 mmc_release_host+0xa0/0xa8
> [ 24.167605]
> [ 24.169104] CPU: 2 PID: 1273 Comm: mmcqd/0 Not tainted
> 4.7.0-11945-gb30f1d6-dirty #706
> [ 24.177024] Hardware name: HiKey Development Board (DT)
> [ 24.182253] task: ffffffc0793d8c80 task.stack: ffffffc078c48000
> [ 24.188178] PC is at mmc_release_host+0xa0/0xa8
> [ 24.192725] LR is at mmc_put_card+0x18/0x3c
> [ 24.196917] pc : [<ffffff80086c2550>] lr : [<ffffff80086c31f4>]
> pstate: 80000145
> [ 24.204317] sp : ffffffc078c4bd20
> [ 24.207636] x29: ffffffc078c4bd20 x28: 0000000000000000
> [ 24.212975] x27: 0000000000000000 x26: ffffffc077903420
> [ 24.216220] x25: ffffffc078788028 x24: ffffffc0787e8800
> [ 24.216232] x23: ffffffc078788000 x22: 0000000000000000
> [ 24.216243] x21: 0000000000000000 x20: ffffffc078788018
> [ 24.216254] x19: ffffffc0787e8800 x18: 0000000000000000
> [ 24.216265] x17: 0000000000000000 x16: 0000000000000000
> [ 24.216276] x15: 0000000000000000 x14: ffffffc078789430
> [ 24.216288] x13: 000000000000002f x12: 000000000000b853
> [ 24.216299] x11: ffffffc077903420 x10: 0000000000000860
> [ 24.216310] x9 : ffffffc078c48000 x8 : ffffffc0793d9540
> [ 24.216322] x7 : 0000000000d3f8c7 x6 : 0000000000002bd0
> [ 24.216333] x5 : 00000000021458fa x4 : 00ffffffffffffff
> [ 24.216344] x3 : 00000000d0555555 x2 : ffffffc078c4bd5c
> [ 24.216355] x1 : 0000000000000000 x0 : 0000000000000000
> [ 24.216366]
> [ 24.216372] ---[ end trace 74dade4766b71d8d ]---
> [ 24.216377] Call trace:
> [ 24.216386] Exception stack(0xffffffc078c4bb50 to 0xffffffc078c4bc80)
> [ 24.216394] bb40:
> ffffffc0787e8800 0000008000000000
> [ 24.216403] bb60: ffffffc078c4bd20 ffffff80086c2550
> ffffff8008ca6000 ffffffc0784fb200
> [ 24.216411] bb80: ffffffc07bf4b7e8 0000000000000008
> ffffffc0793d8d00 ffffff8008c82780
> [ 24.216420] bba0: ffffffc078c4bbe0 ffffff800843576c
> ffffffc078c4bbf0 ffffff800843576c
> [ 24.216429] bbc0: ffffffc078c4bcc0 ffffffc078c4bc78
> ffffffc078c4bc10 ffffff800843576c
> [ 24.216437] bbe0: ffffffc078c4bce0 ffffffc078c4bc98
> 0000000000000000 0000000000000000
> [ 24.216445] bc00: ffffffc078c4bd5c 00000000d0555555
> 00ffffffffffffff 00000000021458fa
> [ 24.216452] bc20: 0000000000002bd0 0000000000d3f8c7
> ffffffc0793d9540 ffffffc078c48000
> [ 24.216460] bc40: 0000000000000860 ffffffc077903420
> 000000000000b853 000000000000002f
> [ 24.216467] bc60: ffffffc078789430 0000000000000000
> 0000000000000000 0000000000000000
> [ 24.216479] [<ffffff80086c2550>] mmc_release_host+0xa0/0xa8
> [ 24.216486] [<ffffff80086c31f4>] mmc_put_card+0x18/0x3c
> [ 24.216497] [<ffffff80086d30e4>] mmc_blk_issue_rq+0x11c/0x4a4
> [ 24.216506] [<ffffff80086d3e44>] mmc_queue_thread+0x98/0x158
> [ 24.216517] [<ffffff80080cfd7c>] kthread+0xd0/0xe4
> [ 24.216527] [<ffffff8008082e90>] ret_from_fork+0x10/0x40
Hey Ulf,
I *think* I've narrowed this down to
6024e16654c1e1a2475e848d735963d05a12dba9 ("mmc: dw_mmc: set to
MMC_CAP_ERASE by default"). Its fairly sporadic so I may be seeing
this as a false positive, but after reverting that patch I've
seemingly stopped seeing the issue.
Anyway, I'll do some further testing tomorrow w/ that removed. Usually
I see the issue 1-2 times an hour, so if I go the day w/o a problem
I'll let you know.
Zhangfei/Guodong: Any ideas as to why ERASE might cause trouble on HiKey?
thanks
-john
Powered by blists - more mailing lists