[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <76df977d164683c7404d2dc702f2e5ad@codeaurora.org>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 11:37:52 +0800
From: Can Guo <cang@...eaurora.org>
To: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-team@...roid.com, alim.akhtar@...sung.com,
avri.altman@....com, bvanassche@....org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/5] scsi: ufs: atomic update for clkgating_enable
On 2020-10-27 11:33, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> On 10/27, Can Guo wrote:
>> On 2020-10-27 03:51, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
>> > From: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...gle.com>
>> >
>> > When giving a stress test which enables/disables clkgating, we hit
>> > device
>> > timeout sometimes. This patch avoids subtle racy condition to address
>> > it.
>> >
>> > Note that, this requires a patch to address the device stuck by
>> > REQ_CLKS_OFF in
>> > __ufshcd_release().
>> >
>> > The fix is "scsi: ufs: avoid to call REQ_CLKS_OFF to CLKS_OFF".
>>
>> Why don't you just squash the fix into this one?
>
> I'm seeing this patch just revealed that problem.
That scenario (back to back calling of ufshcd_release()) only happens
when you stress the clkgate_enable sysfs node, so let's keep the fix
as one to make things simple. What do you think?
Thanks,
Can Guo.
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Can Guo.
>>
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...gle.com>
>> > ---
>> > drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c | 12 ++++++------
>> > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
>> > index cc8d5f0c3fdc..6c9269bffcbd 100644
>> > --- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
>> > +++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
>> > @@ -1808,19 +1808,19 @@ static ssize_t
>> > ufshcd_clkgate_enable_store(struct device *dev,
>> > return -EINVAL;
>> >
>> > value = !!value;
>> > +
>> > + spin_lock_irqsave(hba->host->host_lock, flags);
>> > if (value == hba->clk_gating.is_enabled)
>> > goto out;
>> >
>> > - if (value) {
>> > - ufshcd_release(hba);
>> > - } else {
>> > - spin_lock_irqsave(hba->host->host_lock, flags);
>> > + if (value)
>> > + __ufshcd_release(hba);
>> > + else
>> > hba->clk_gating.active_reqs++;
>> > - spin_unlock_irqrestore(hba->host->host_lock, flags);
>> > - }
>> >
>> > hba->clk_gating.is_enabled = value;
>> > out:
>> > + spin_unlock_irqrestore(hba->host->host_lock, flags);
>> > return count;
>> > }
Powered by blists - more mailing lists