| 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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2021 18:17:35 +0100
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To: "Asutosh Das (asd)" <asutoshd@...eaurora.org>
Cc: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>, cang@...eaurora.org,
"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
"open list:TARGET SUBSYSTEM" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>,
linux-arm-msm <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>,
Avri Altman <avri.altman@....com>,
"James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
Stanley Chu <stanley.chu@...iatek.com>,
Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
Kiwoong Kim <kwmad.kim@...sung.com>,
Bean Huo <beanhuo@...ron.com>,
Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
Wei Yongjun <weiyongjun1@...wei.com>,
Dinghao Liu <dinghao.liu@....edu.cn>,
"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@...nel.org>,
Tomas Winkler <tomas.winkler@...el.com>,
Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org>,
Satya Tangirala <satyat@...gle.com>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"moderated list:ARM/SAMSUNG S3C, S5P AND EXYNOS ARM ARCHITECTURES"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"open list:ARM/SAMSUNG S3C, S5P AND EXYNOS ARM ARCHITECTURES"
<linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
"moderated list:UNIVERSAL FLASH STORAGE HOST CONTROLLER DRIVER..."
<linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org>,
Linux-PM mailing list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 1/2] scsi: ufs: Enable power management for wlun
On Mon, Mar 8, 2021 at 5:21 PM Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Mar 6, 2021 at 5:17 PM Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 05, 2021 at 06:54:24PM -0800, Asutosh Das (asd) wrote:
> >
> > > Now during my testing I see a weird issue sometimes (1 in 7).
> > > Scenario - bootups
> > >
> > > Issue:
> > > The supplier 'ufs_device_wlun 0:0:0:49488' goes into runtime suspend even
> > > when one/more of its consumers are in RPM_ACTIVE state.
> > >
> > > *Log:
> > > [ 10.056379][ T206] sd 0:0:0:1: [sdb] Synchronizing SCSI cache
> > > [ 10.062497][ T113] sd 0:0:0:5: [sdf] Synchronizing SCSI cache
> > > [ 10.356600][ T32] sd 0:0:0:7: [sdh] Synchronizing SCSI cache
> > > [ 10.362944][ T174] sd 0:0:0:3: [sdd] Synchronizing SCSI cache
> > > [ 10.696627][ T83] sd 0:0:0:2: [sdc] Synchronizing SCSI cache
> > > [ 10.704562][ T170] sd 0:0:0:6: [sdg] Synchronizing SCSI cache
> > > [ 10.980602][ T5] sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Synchronizing SCSI cache
> > >
> > > /** Printing all the consumer nodes of supplier **/
> > > [ 10.987327][ T5] ufs_device_wlun 0:0:0:49488: usage-count @ suspend: 0
> > > <-- this is the usage_count
> > > [ 10.994440][ T5] ufs_rpmb_wlun 0:0:0:49476: PM state - 2
> > > [ 11.000402][ T5] scsi 0:0:0:49456: PM state - 2
> > > [ 11.005453][ T5] sd 0:0:0:0: PM state - 2
> > > [ 11.009958][ T5] sd 0:0:0:1: PM state - 2
> > > [ 11.014469][ T5] sd 0:0:0:2: PM state - 2
> > > [ 11.019072][ T5] sd 0:0:0:3: PM state - 2
> > > [ 11.023595][ T5] sd 0:0:0:4: PM state - 0 << RPM_ACTIVE
> > > [ 11.353298][ T5] sd 0:0:0:5: PM state - 2
> > > [ 11.357726][ T5] sd 0:0:0:6: PM state - 2
> > > [ 11.362155][ T5] sd 0:0:0:7: PM state - 2
> > > [ 11.366584][ T5] ufshcd-qcom 1d84000.ufshc: __ufshcd_wl_suspend - 8709
> > > [ 11.374366][ T5] ufs_device_wlun 0:0:0:49488: __ufshcd_wl_suspend -
> > > (0) has rpm_active flags
>
> Do you mean that rpm_active of the link between the consumer and the
> supplier is greater than 0 at this point and the consumer is
I mean is rpm_active of the link greater than 1 (because 1 means "no
active references to the supplier")?
> RPM_ACTIVE, but the supplier suspends successfully nevertheless?
>
> > > [ 11.383376][ T5] ufs_device_wlun 0:0:0:49488:
> > > ufshcd_wl_runtime_suspend <-- Supplier suspends fine.
> > > [ 12.977318][ T174] sd 0:0:0:4: [sde] Synchronizing SCSI cache
> > >
> > > And the the suspend of sde is stuck now:
> > > schedule+0x9c/0xe0
> > > schedule_timeout+0x40/0x128
> > > io_schedule_timeout+0x44/0x68
> > > wait_for_common_io+0x7c/0x100
> > > wait_for_completion_io+0x14/0x20
> > > blk_execute_rq+0x90/0xcc
> > > __scsi_execute+0x104/0x1c4
> > > sd_sync_cache+0xf8/0x2a0
> > > sd_suspend_common+0x74/0x11c
> > > sd_suspend_runtime+0x14/0x20
> > > scsi_runtime_suspend+0x64/0x94
> > > __rpm_callback+0x80/0x2a4
> > > rpm_suspend+0x308/0x614
> > > pm_runtime_work+0x98/0xa8
> > >
> > > I added 'DL_FLAG_RPM_ACTIVE' while creating links.
> > > if (hba->sdev_ufs_device) {
> > > link = device_link_add(&sdev->sdev_gendev,
> > > &hba->sdev_ufs_device->sdev_gendev,
> > > DL_FLAG_PM_RUNTIME|DL_FLAG_RPM_ACTIVE);
> > > I didn't expect this to resolve the issue anyway and it didn't.
> > >
> > > Another interesting point here is when I resume any of the above suspended
> > > consumers, it all goes back to normal, which is kind of expected. I tried
> > > resuming the consumer and the supplier is resumed and the supplier is
> > > suspended when all the consumers are suspended.
> > >
> > > Any pointers on this issue please?
> > >
> > > @Bart/@...n - Do you've any pointers please?
> >
> > It's very noticeable that although you seem to have isolated a bug in
> > the power management subsystem (supplier goes into runtime suspend
> > even when one of its consumers is still active), you did not CC the
> > power management maintainer or mailing list.
> >
> > I have added the appropriate CC's.
>
> Thanks Alan!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists