[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1704331491-115325-1-git-send-email-kwmad.kim@samsung.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2024 10:24:50 +0900
From: Kiwoong Kim <kwmad.kim@...sung.com>
To: linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
alim.akhtar@...sung.com, avri.altman@....com, bvanassche@....org,
jejb@...ux.ibm.com, martin.petersen@...cle.com, beanhuo@...ron.com,
adrian.hunter@...el.com, h10.kim@...sung.com, hy50.seo@...sung.com,
sh425.lee@...sung.com, kwangwon.min@...sung.com, junwoo80.lee@...sung.com,
wkon.kim@...sung.com
Cc: Kiwoong Kim <kwmad.kim@...sung.com>
Subject: [PATCH v1] ufs: get target SQ entry within critical section
In IO centric scenarios, especially during a period that
many IO requests are submitted to a same HW queue at the same
time, it's found that one reqeust overwrote a SQ entry
that had been already occupied by another request submitted
in the past. And it eventually led to command timed-out
because one of two requests were overwritten, which could not
be completed.
[ 74.995185][ T176] exynos-ufs 17100000.ufs: ufshcd_abort: Device abort task at tag 30
Signed-off-by: Kiwoong Kim <kwmad.kim@...sung.com>
---
drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c
index 7bc3fc4..da1a9c0 100644
--- a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c
+++ b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c
@@ -2199,9 +2199,10 @@ void ufshcd_send_command(struct ufs_hba *hba, unsigned int task_tag,
if (is_mcq_enabled(hba)) {
int utrd_size = sizeof(struct utp_transfer_req_desc);
struct utp_transfer_req_desc *src = lrbp->utr_descriptor_ptr;
- struct utp_transfer_req_desc *dest = hwq->sqe_base_addr + hwq->sq_tail_slot;
+ struct utp_transfer_req_desc *dest;
spin_lock(&hwq->sq_lock);
+ dest = hwq->sqe_base_addr + hwq->sq_tail_slot;
memcpy(dest, src, utrd_size);
ufshcd_inc_sq_tail(hwq);
spin_unlock(&hwq->sq_lock);
--
2.7.4
Powered by blists - more mailing lists