linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] i2c: tegra: Better handle case where CPU0 is busy for a long time

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20200429085502.GB2345465@ulmo>
Date:   Wed, 29 Apr 2020 10:55:02 +0200
From:   Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>
To:     Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>
Cc:     Jon Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>,
        Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>,
        Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com>,
        Manikanta Maddireddy <mmaddireddy@...dia.com>,
        Vidya Sagar <vidyas@...dia.com>, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] i2c: tegra: Better handle case where CPU0 is busy
 for a long time

On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 10:14:48AM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 06:18:34PM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
> > 27.04.2020 18:12, Thierry Reding пишет:
> > > On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 05:21:30PM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
> > >> 27.04.2020 14:00, Thierry Reding пишет:
> > >>> On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 12:52:10PM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
> > >>>> 27.04.2020 10:48, Thierry Reding пишет:
> > >>>> ...
> > >>>>>> Maybe but all these other problems appear to have existed for sometime
> > >>>>>> now. We need to fix all, but for the moment we need to figure out what's
> > >>>>>> best for v5.7.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> To me it doesn't sound like we have a good handle on what exactly is
> > >>>>> going on here and we're mostly just poking around.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> And even if things weren't working quite properly before, it sounds to
> > >>>>> me like this patch actually made things worse.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> There is a plenty of time to work on the proper fix now. To me it sounds
> > >>>> like you're giving up on fixing the root of the problem, sorry.
> > >>>
> > >>> We're at -rc3 now and I haven't seen any promising progress in the last
> > >>> week. All the while suspend/resume is now broken on at least one board
> > >>> and that may end up hiding any other issues that could creep in in the
> > >>> meantime.
> > >>>
> > >>> Furthermore we seem to have a preexisting issue that may very well
> > >>> interfere with this patch, so I think the cautious thing is to revert
> > >>> for now and then fix the original issue first. We can always come back
> > >>> to this once everything is back to normal.
> > >>>
> > >>> Also, people are now looking at backporting this to v5.6. Unless we
> > >>> revert this from v5.7 it may get picked up for backports to other
> > >>> kernels and then I have to notify stable kernel maintainers that they
> > >>> shouldn't and they have to back things out again. That's going to cause
> > >>> a lot of wasted time for a lot of people.
> > >>>
> > >>> So, sorry, I disagree. I don't think we have "plenty of time".
> > >>
> > >> There is about a month now before the 5.7 release. It's a bit too early
> > >> to start the panic, IMO :)
> > > 
> > > There's no panic. A patch got merged and it broken something, so we
> > > revert it and try again. It's very much standard procedure.
> > > 
> > >> Jon already proposed a reasonable simple solution: to keep PCIe
> > >> regulators always-ON. In a longer run we may want to have I2C atomic
> > >> transfers supported for a late suspend phase.
> > > 
> > > That's not really a solution, though, is it? It's just papering over
> > > an issue that this patch introduced or uncovered. I'm much more in
> > > favour of fixing problems at the root rather than keep papering over
> > > until we loose track of what the actual problems are.
> > 
> > It's not "papering over an issue". The bug can't be fixed properly
> > without introducing I2C atomic transfers support for a late suspend
> > phase, I don't see any other solutions for now. Stable kernels do not
> > support atomic transfers at all, that proper solution won't be backportable.
> 
> Hm... on a hunch I tried something and, lo and behold, it worked. I can
> get Cardhu to properly suspend/resume on top of v5.7-rc3 with the
> following sequence:
> 
> 	revert 9f42de8d4ec2 i2c: tegra: Fix suspending in active runtime PM state
> 	apply http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/linux-tegra/patch/20191213134417.222720-1-thierry.reding@gmail.com/
> 
> I also ran that through our test farm and I don't see any other issues.
> At the time I was already skeptical about pm_runtime_force_suspend() and
> pm_runtime_force_resume() and while I'm not fully certain why exactly it
> doesn't work, the above on top of v5.7-rc3 seems like a good option.
> 
> I'll try to do some digging if I can find out why exactly force suspend
> and resume doesn't work.

Ah... so it looks like pm_runtime_force_resume() never actually does
anything in this case and then disable_depth remains at 1 and the first
tegra_i2c_xfer() will then fail to runtime resume the controller.

Thierry

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)