[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZiJxSeao5Zcv9KdF@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2024 16:27:37 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Jiawen Wu <jiawenwu@...stnetic.com>
Cc: brgl@...ev.pl, bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org, elder@...aro.org,
geert+renesas@...der.be, linus.walleij@...aro.org,
linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
paulmck@...nel.org, warthog618@...il.com, wsa@...-dreams.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/24] gpio: rework locking and object life-time
control
On Fri, Apr 19, 2024 at 03:03:54PM +0800, Jiawen Wu wrote:
> Hi Bartosz Golaszewski,
>
> I ran into a kernel crash problem when I pull the latest net-next.git, and
> finally it was found that is caused by this patch series merged.
Can you bisect further, i.e. which patch (now a commit message) is the culprit?
> The kernel crashed because I got gpio=0 when I called irq_find_mapping()
> and then struct irq_data *d=null, as my driver describes:
>
> int gpio = irq_find_mapping(gc->irq.domain, hwirq);
> struct irq_data *d = irq_get_irq_data(gpio);
>
> txgbe_gpio_irq_ack(d);
>
> The deeper positioning is this line in __irq_resolve_mapping().
>
> data = rcu_dereference(domain->revmap[hwirq]);
>
> So, is it the addition of SRCU infrastructure that causes this issue?
Do you have a full traceback / Oops message to share?
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists