[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <81e403f0-51b4-4efd-a06c-c6d7b02802dd@quicinc.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2025 14:03:24 +0800
From: Ziqi Chen <quic_ziqichen@...cinc.com>
To: Peter Wang (王信友) <peter.wang@...iatek.com>,
"beanhuo@...ron.com" <beanhuo@...ron.com>,
"avri.altman@....com"
<avri.altman@....com>,
"neil.armstrong@...aro.org"
<neil.armstrong@...aro.org>,
"quic_cang@...cinc.com" <quic_cang@...cinc.com>,
"quic_nitirawa@...cinc.com" <quic_nitirawa@...cinc.com>,
"quic_nguyenb@...cinc.com" <quic_nguyenb@...cinc.com>,
"bvanassche@....org"
<bvanassche@....org>,
"luca.weiss@...rphone.com" <luca.weiss@...rphone.com>,
"konrad.dybcio@....qualcomm.com" <konrad.dybcio@....qualcomm.com>,
"junwoo80.lee@...sung.com" <junwoo80.lee@...sung.com>,
"mani@...nel.org"
<mani@...nel.org>,
"martin.petersen@...cle.com" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
"quic_rampraka@...cinc.com" <quic_rampraka@...cinc.com>
CC: "linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
Tze-nan Wu (吳澤南) <Tze-nan.Wu@...iatek.com>,
"linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
"manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org" <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>,
"alim.akhtar@...sung.com" <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>,
"James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com"
<James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] scsi: ufs: core: Don't perform UFS clkscale if host
asyn scan in progress
On 8/4/2025 8:43 PM, Peter Wang (王信友) wrote:
> On Mon, 2025-08-04 at 15:54 +0800, Ziqi Chen wrote:
>>
>> Hi Peter && Bart,
>>
>> How do you think about using
>>
>> if (!mutex_trylock(&hba->host->scan_mutex))
>> return -EAGAIN;
>>
>> instead of
>>
>> mutex_lock(&hba->host->scan_mutex);
>>
>> But this way will cause one line print of devfreq failed.
>>
>> BRs
>> Ziqi
>
>
> Hi Ziqi,
>
> After applying the patch below, the lockdep issue no longer appears.
> Would you be able to upstream this fix?
>
> ---
>
> diff --git a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c
> index 2ff91f2..0af34ce 100644
> --- a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c
> +++ b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c
> @@ -1435,7 +1435,8 @@ static int ufshcd_clock_scaling_prepare(struct
> ufs_hba *hba, u64 timeout_us)
> * make sure that there are no outstanding requests when
> * clock scaling is in progress
> */
> - mutex_lock(&hba->host->scan_mutex);
> + if(!mutex_trylock(&hba->host->scan_mutex))
> + return -EAGAIN;
> blk_mq_quiesce_tagset(&hba->host->tag_set);
> mutex_lock(&hba->wb_mutex);
> down_write(&hba->clk_scaling_lock);
>
>
> Thanks.
> Peter
Hi Peter,
I saw you raised a ACK change to revert this whole change on branch
Android16-6.12. Without this change, you will meet stuck issue during
stability reboot test due to request queue quiesce and unquiesce
mismatch.
This lockdep print just a warning, and as per my analysis before, This
is a misjudgment. But stuck/crash issue is a real issue which has real
instance.
Can you abort your reverting change?
BRs,
Ziqi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists