From: peter.ujfalusi@ti•com (Peter Ujfalusi)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists•infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 0/2] ARM: omap2+: omap_hwmod: Fix false lockdep warning
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2015 18:05:32 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <54D4E64C.7060208@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150206141346.GP21418@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On 02/06/2015 04:13 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 06, 2015 at 02:48:34PM +0200, Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> In case when hwmods are used in nested way the lockdep validator will print out
>> a warning message about possible deadlock situation:
>>
>> [ 4.514882] =============================================
>> [ 4.520530] [ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ]
>> [ 4.526176] 3.14.30-00289-ge44872fdca8f-dirty #198 Not tainted
>> [ 4.532285] ---------------------------------------------
>> [ 4.537936] kworker/u4:1/18 is trying to acquire lock:
>> [ 4.543317] (&(&oh->_lock)->rlock){......}, at: [<c002d2dc>] omap_hwmod_enable+0x2c/0x58
>> [ 4.552109]
>> [ 4.552109] but task is already holding lock:
>> [ 4.558216] (&(&oh->_lock)->rlock){......}, at: [<c002d2dc>] omap_hwmod_enable+0x2c/0x58
>> [ 4.566999]
>> [ 4.566999] other info that might help us debug this:
>> [ 4.573831] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
>> [ 4.573831]
>> [ 4.580025] CPU0
>> [ 4.582584] ----
>> [ 4.585142] lock(&(&oh->_lock)->rlock);
>> [ 4.589544] lock(&(&oh->_lock)->rlock);
>> [ 4.593945]
>> [ 4.593945] *** DEADLOCK ***
>> [ 4.593945]
>> [ 4.600146] May be due to missing lock nesting notation
>>
>> What lockdep did not realizes is that the two oh is not the same hwmod object
>> and we have taken different locks.
>>
>> One example of nested hwmod usage is on DRA7xx platforms, where McASP can be
>> configured to use ATL clock as it's functional clock. In this case the
>> pm_runtime_get/put_sync call will enable the mcasp hwmod and as part of this
>> operation it will enable the needed clocks. Since ATL clock is needed, we will
>> have another pm_runtime operation from the ATL clock enable callback which
>> will take the atl hwmod's lock. This will be seen by lockdep as possible
>> deadlock situation.
>>
>> In order to notify lockdep about this, we need to switch using _nested
>> version of locking function and assign different subclass to those hwmods which
>> could be used in nested way.
>
> IFF struct omap_hwmod is always statically allocated; as I think the
> __init on _register() mandates, you can use the below annotation.
>
> ---
> arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod.c | 1 +
> arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod.h | 2 ++
> 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod.c
> index 9025ffffd2dc..222d654ad6fd 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod.c
> @@ -2698,6 +2698,7 @@ static int __init _register(struct omap_hwmod *oh)
> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&oh->master_ports);
> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&oh->slave_ports);
> spin_lock_init(&oh->_lock);
> + lockdep_set_class(&oh->_lock, &oh->hwmod_key);
>
> oh->_state = _HWMOD_STATE_REGISTERED;
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod.h b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod.h
> index 5b42fafcaf55..754bdfb3f811 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod.h
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod.h
> @@ -689,6 +689,8 @@ struct omap_hwmod {
> u8 _state;
> u8 _postsetup_state;
> struct omap_hwmod *parent_hwmod;
> +
> + struct lock_class_key hwmod_key;
> };
>
> struct omap_hwmod *omap_hwmod_lookup(const char *name);
Certainly looks much simpler, but it adds quite a bit of data to the
omap_hwmod struct, and we have a _lot_ of them for omap2plus configuration.
ls -al vmlinux
w/o any the lockdep warning fixes:
110109168
With my series applied:
110112031 (base + 2863)
With setting individual lockdep class:
110114275 (base + 5107)
I certainly like the lockdep_set_class() way since it is cleaner, but it adds
almost double amount of bytes to the kernel.
I'll test the patch on my board tomorrow as first thing.
--
P?ter
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-02-06 16:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-02-06 12:48 [PATCH 0/2] ARM: omap2+: omap_hwmod: Fix false lockdep warning Peter Ujfalusi
2015-02-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 1/2] ARM: omap2+: omap_hwmod: Use _nested version of spinlock for oh->_lock Peter Ujfalusi
2015-02-06 12:48 ` [PATCH 2/2] ARM: DRA7: hwmod_data: Change locked_class for atl hwmod Peter Ujfalusi
2015-02-06 14:13 ` [PATCH 0/2] ARM: omap2+: omap_hwmod: Fix false lockdep warning Peter Zijlstra
2015-02-06 16:05 ` Peter Ujfalusi [this message]
2015-02-06 18:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-02-06 19:26 ` Peter Ujfalusi
2015-02-09 8:27 ` Peter Ujfalusi
2015-02-09 9:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-02-09 16:00 ` Paul Walmsley
2015-02-09 17:31 ` Tony Lindgren
2015-02-09 18:55 ` Paul Walmsley
2015-02-09 22:16 ` Tony Lindgren
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=54D4E64C.7060208@ti.com \
--to=peter.ujfalusi@ti$(echo .)com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists$(echo .)infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox