[name:lockdep&]WARNING: inconsistent lock state
[name:lockdep&]--------------------------------
[name:lockdep&]inconsistent {IN-HARDIRQ-W} -> {HARDIRQ-ON-W} usage.
[name:lockdep&]kworker/u16:4/260 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE1:SE1] takes:
ffffff8028444600 (&hwq->cq_lock){?.-.}-{2:2}, at:
ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_lock+0x30/0xe0
[name:lockdep&]{IN-HARDIRQ-W} state was registered at:
lock_acquire+0x17c/0x33c
_raw_spin_lock+0x5c/0x7c
ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_lock+0x30/0xe0
ufs_mtk_mcq_intr+0x60/0x1bc [ufs_mediatek_mod]
__handle_irq_event_percpu+0x140/0x3ec
handle_irq_event+0x50/0xd8
handle_fasteoi_irq+0x148/0x2b0
generic_handle_domain_irq+0x4c/0x6c
gic_handle_irq+0x58/0x134
call_on_irq_stack+0x40/0x74
do_interrupt_handler+0x84/0xe4
el1_interrupt+0x3c/0x78
<snip>
Possible unsafe locking scenario:
CPU0
----
lock(&hwq->cq_lock);
<Interrupt>
lock(&hwq->cq_lock);
*** DEADLOCK ***
2 locks held by kworker/u16:4/260:
[name:lockdep&]
stack backtrace:
CPU: 7 PID: 260 Comm: kworker/u16:4 Tainted: G S W OE
6.1.17-mainline-android14-2-g277223301adb #1
Workqueue: ufs_eh_wq_0 ufshcd_err_handler
Call trace:
dump_backtrace+0x10c/0x160
show_stack+0x20/0x30
dump_stack_lvl+0x98/0xd8
dump_stack+0x20/0x60
print_usage_bug+0x584/0x76c
mark_lock_irq+0x488/0x510
mark_lock+0x1ec/0x25c
__lock_acquire+0x4d8/0xffc
lock_acquire+0x17c/0x33c
_raw_spin_lock+0x5c/0x7c
ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_lock+0x30/0xe0
ufshcd_poll+0x68/0x1b0
ufshcd_transfer_req_compl+0x9c/0xc8
ufshcd_err_handler+0x3bc/0xea0
process_one_work+0x2f4/0x7e8
worker_thread+0x234/0x450
kthread+0x110/0x134
ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20
ufs_mtk_mcq_intr() could refer to
https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
When ufshcd_err_handler() is executed, CQ event interrupt can enter
waiting for the same lock. It could happened in upstream code path
ufshcd_handle_mcq_cq_events() and also in ufs_mtk_mcq_intr(). This
warning message will be generated when &hwq->cq_lock is used in IRQ
context with IRQ enabled. Use ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_lock() with
spin_lock_irqsave instead of spin_lock to resolve the deadlock issue.
Signed-off-by: Alice Chao <[email protected]>
---
drivers/ufs/core/ufs-mcq.c | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/ufs/core/ufs-mcq.c b/drivers/ufs/core/ufs-mcq.c
index 31df052fbc41..202ff71e1b58 100644
--- a/drivers/ufs/core/ufs-mcq.c
+++ b/drivers/ufs/core/ufs-mcq.c
@@ -299,11 +299,11 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_nolock);
unsigned long ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_lock(struct ufs_hba *hba,
struct ufs_hw_queue *hwq)
{
- unsigned long completed_reqs;
+ unsigned long completed_reqs, flags;
- spin_lock(&hwq->cq_lock);
+ spin_lock_irqsave(&hwq->cq_lock, flags);
completed_reqs = ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_nolock(hba, hwq);
- spin_unlock(&hwq->cq_lock);
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(&hwq->cq_lock, flags);
return completed_reqs;
}
--
2.18.0
On 4/21/2023 3:56 PM, Alice Chao wrote:
> [name:lockdep&]WARNING: inconsistent lock state
> [name:lockdep&]--------------------------------
> [name:lockdep&]inconsistent {IN-HARDIRQ-W} -> {HARDIRQ-ON-W} usage.
> [name:lockdep&]kworker/u16:4/260 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE1:SE1] takes:
> ffffff8028444600 (&hwq->cq_lock){?.-.}-{2:2}, at:
> ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_lock+0x30/0xe0
> [name:lockdep&]{IN-HARDIRQ-W} state was registered at:
> lock_acquire+0x17c/0x33c
> _raw_spin_lock+0x5c/0x7c
> ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_lock+0x30/0xe0
> ufs_mtk_mcq_intr+0x60/0x1bc [ufs_mediatek_mod]
> __handle_irq_event_percpu+0x140/0x3ec
> handle_irq_event+0x50/0xd8
> handle_fasteoi_irq+0x148/0x2b0
> generic_handle_domain_irq+0x4c/0x6c
> gic_handle_irq+0x58/0x134
> call_on_irq_stack+0x40/0x74
> do_interrupt_handler+0x84/0xe4
> el1_interrupt+0x3c/0x78
> <snip>
>
> Possible unsafe locking scenario:
> CPU0
> ----
> lock(&hwq->cq_lock);
> <Interrupt>
> lock(&hwq->cq_lock);
> *** DEADLOCK ***
> 2 locks held by kworker/u16:4/260:
>
> [name:lockdep&]
> stack backtrace:
> CPU: 7 PID: 260 Comm: kworker/u16:4 Tainted: G S W OE
> 6.1.17-mainline-android14-2-g277223301adb #1
> Workqueue: ufs_eh_wq_0 ufshcd_err_handler
>
> Call trace:
> dump_backtrace+0x10c/0x160
> show_stack+0x20/0x30
> dump_stack_lvl+0x98/0xd8
> dump_stack+0x20/0x60
> print_usage_bug+0x584/0x76c
> mark_lock_irq+0x488/0x510
> mark_lock+0x1ec/0x25c
> __lock_acquire+0x4d8/0xffc
> lock_acquire+0x17c/0x33c
> _raw_spin_lock+0x5c/0x7c
> ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_lock+0x30/0xe0
> ufshcd_poll+0x68/0x1b0
> ufshcd_transfer_req_compl+0x9c/0xc8
> ufshcd_err_handler+0x3bc/0xea0
> process_one_work+0x2f4/0x7e8
> worker_thread+0x234/0x450
> kthread+0x110/0x134
> ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20
>
> ufs_mtk_mcq_intr() could refer to
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
>
> When ufshcd_err_handler() is executed, CQ event interrupt can enter
> waiting for the same lock. It could happened in upstream code path
> ufshcd_handle_mcq_cq_events() and also in ufs_mtk_mcq_intr(). This
> warning message will be generated when &hwq->cq_lock is used in IRQ
> context with IRQ enabled. Use ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_lock() with
> spin_lock_irqsave instead of spin_lock to resolve the deadlock issue.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alice Chao <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/ufs/core/ufs-mcq.c | 6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/ufs/core/ufs-mcq.c b/drivers/ufs/core/ufs-mcq.c
> index 31df052fbc41..202ff71e1b58 100644
> --- a/drivers/ufs/core/ufs-mcq.c
> +++ b/drivers/ufs/core/ufs-mcq.c
> @@ -299,11 +299,11 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_nolock);
> unsigned long ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_lock(struct ufs_hba *hba,
> struct ufs_hw_queue *hwq)
> {
> - unsigned long completed_reqs;
> + unsigned long completed_reqs, flags;
>
> - spin_lock(&hwq->cq_lock);
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&hwq->cq_lock, flags);
> completed_reqs = ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_nolock(hba, hwq);
> - spin_unlock(&hwq->cq_lock);
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&hwq->cq_lock, flags);
>
> return completed_reqs;
> }
Reviewed-by: Can Guo <[email protected]>
Thanks for the fix.
Regards,
Can Guo.
On 4/21/23 00:56, Alice Chao wrote:
> When ufshcd_err_handler() is executed, CQ event interrupt can enter
> waiting for the same lock. It could happened in upstream code path
> ufshcd_handle_mcq_cq_events() and also in ufs_mtk_mcq_intr(). This
> warning message will be generated when &hwq->cq_lock is used in IRQ
> context with IRQ enabled. Use ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_lock() with
> spin_lock_irqsave instead of spin_lock to resolve the deadlock issue.
Please add a Fixes: tag.
Thanks,
Bart.
Hi Alice,
Alice Chao <[email protected]> 於 2023年4月21日 週五 下午3:58寫道：
>
> [name:lockdep&]WARNING: inconsistent lock state
> [name:lockdep&]--------------------------------
> [name:lockdep&]inconsistent {IN-HARDIRQ-W} -> {HARDIRQ-ON-W} usage.
> [name:lockdep&]kworker/u16:4/260 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE1:SE1] takes:
> ffffff8028444600 (&hwq->cq_lock){?.-.}-{2:2}, at:
> ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_lock+0x30/0xe0
> [name:lockdep&]{IN-HARDIRQ-W} state was registered at:
> lock_acquire+0x17c/0x33c
> _raw_spin_lock+0x5c/0x7c
> ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_lock+0x30/0xe0
> ufs_mtk_mcq_intr+0x60/0x1bc [ufs_mediatek_mod]
> __handle_irq_event_percpu+0x140/0x3ec
> handle_irq_event+0x50/0xd8
> handle_fasteoi_irq+0x148/0x2b0
> generic_handle_domain_irq+0x4c/0x6c
> gic_handle_irq+0x58/0x134
> call_on_irq_stack+0x40/0x74
> do_interrupt_handler+0x84/0xe4
> el1_interrupt+0x3c/0x78
> <snip>
>
> Possible unsafe locking scenario:
> CPU0
> ----
> lock(&hwq->cq_lock);
> <Interrupt>
> lock(&hwq->cq_lock);
> *** DEADLOCK ***
> 2 locks held by kworker/u16:4/260:
>
> [name:lockdep&]
> stack backtrace:
> CPU: 7 PID: 260 Comm: kworker/u16:4 Tainted: G S W OE
> 6.1.17-mainline-android14-2-g277223301adb #1
> Workqueue: ufs_eh_wq_0 ufshcd_err_handler
>
> Call trace:
> dump_backtrace+0x10c/0x160
> show_stack+0x20/0x30
> dump_stack_lvl+0x98/0xd8
> dump_stack+0x20/0x60
> print_usage_bug+0x584/0x76c
> mark_lock_irq+0x488/0x510
> mark_lock+0x1ec/0x25c
> __lock_acquire+0x4d8/0xffc
> lock_acquire+0x17c/0x33c
> _raw_spin_lock+0x5c/0x7c
> ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_lock+0x30/0xe0
> ufshcd_poll+0x68/0x1b0
> ufshcd_transfer_req_compl+0x9c/0xc8
> ufshcd_err_handler+0x3bc/0xea0
> process_one_work+0x2f4/0x7e8
> worker_thread+0x234/0x450
> kthread+0x110/0x134
> ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20
>
> ufs_mtk_mcq_intr() could refer to
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
>
> When ufshcd_err_handler() is executed, CQ event interrupt can enter
> waiting for the same lock. It could happened in upstream code path
> ufshcd_handle_mcq_cq_events() and also in ufs_mtk_mcq_intr(). This
> warning message will be generated when &hwq->cq_lock is used in IRQ
> context with IRQ enabled. Use ufshcd_mcq_poll_cqe_lock() with
> spin_lock_irqsave instead of spin_lock to resolve the deadlock issue.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alice Chao <[email protected]>
> ---
After adding a Fixes: tag, feel free to add,
Reviewed-by: Stanley Chu <[email protected]>