[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAOCk7NpLLV8yoWsrFKJ+OirGcQjeP4NmFYnMfXj-9=sMt7E94Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 08:37:19 -0600
From: Jeffrey Hugo <jeffrey.l.hugo@...il.com>
To: Can Guo <cang@...eaurora.org>
Cc: Asutosh Das <asutoshd@...eaurora.org>, nguyenb@...eaurora.org,
hongwus@...eaurora.org, Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@...eaurora.org>,
sh425.lee@...sung.com, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-team@...roid.com, saravanak@...gle.com,
Mark Salyzyn <salyzyn@...gle.com>,
Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>,
Avri Altman <avri.altman@....com>,
"James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>,
"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
"open list:ARM/QUALCOMM SUPPORT" <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/8] ufs: ufs-qcom: Fix a few BUGs in func ufs_qcom_dump_dbg_regs()
On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 12:39 AM Can Guo <cang@...eaurora.org> wrote:
>
> Dumping testbus registers needs to sleep a bit intermittently as there are
> too many of them. Skip them for those contexts where sleep is not allowed.
>
> Meanwhile, if ufs_qcom_dump_dbg_regs() calls ufs_qcom_testbus_config() from
> ufshcd_suspend/resume and/or clk gate/ungate context, pm_runtime_get_sync()
> and ufshcd_hold() will cause racing problems. Fix it by removing the
> unnecessary calls of pm_runtime_get_sync() and ufshcd_hold().
It sounds like this is two different changes which are clubbed
together into the same patch and really should be two different
patches.
>
> Signed-off-by: Can Guo <cang@...eaurora.org>
> ---
> drivers/scsi/ufs/ufs-qcom.c | 17 +++++++----------
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufs-qcom.c b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufs-qcom.c
> index 2e6ddb5..3743c17 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufs-qcom.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufs-qcom.c
> @@ -1604,9 +1604,6 @@ int ufs_qcom_testbus_config(struct ufs_qcom_host *host)
> */
> }
> mask <<= offset;
> -
> - pm_runtime_get_sync(host->hba->dev);
> - ufshcd_hold(host->hba, false);
> ufshcd_rmwl(host->hba, TEST_BUS_SEL,
> (u32)host->testbus.select_major << 19,
> REG_UFS_CFG1);
> @@ -1619,8 +1616,6 @@ int ufs_qcom_testbus_config(struct ufs_qcom_host *host)
> * committed before returning.
> */
> mb();
> - ufshcd_release(host->hba);
> - pm_runtime_put_sync(host->hba->dev);
>
> return 0;
> }
> @@ -1658,11 +1653,13 @@ static void ufs_qcom_dump_dbg_regs(struct ufs_hba *hba)
>
> /* sleep a bit intermittently as we are dumping too much data */
> ufs_qcom_print_hw_debug_reg_all(hba, NULL, ufs_qcom_dump_regs_wrapper);
> - udelay(1000);
> - ufs_qcom_testbus_read(hba);
> - udelay(1000);
> - ufs_qcom_print_unipro_testbus(hba);
> - udelay(1000);
> + if (in_task()) {
> + udelay(1000);
> + ufs_qcom_testbus_read(hba);
> + udelay(1000);
> + ufs_qcom_print_unipro_testbus(hba);
> + udelay(1000);
> + }
Did you run into a specific issue with this? udelay is not a "sleep"
in the sense that it causes scheduling to occur, which is the problem
with atomic contexts.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists