Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755866Ab3GAWRQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Jul 2013 18:17:16 -0400 Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:49980 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755740Ab3GAWRN (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Jul 2013 18:17:13 -0400 Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2013 15:17:12 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: Sujit Reddy Thumma Cc: Aaron Lu , Jens Axboe , linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: Fix possible sleep in invalid context Message-Id: <20130701151712.f453745bc0c587f449cc3214@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <1372692515-31969-1-git-send-email-sthumma@codeaurora.org> References: <1372692515-31969-1-git-send-email-sthumma@codeaurora.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.2.0beta5 (GTK+ 2.24.10; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2669 Lines: 80 On Mon, 1 Jul 2013 20:58:35 +0530 Sujit Reddy Thumma wrote: > When block runtime PM is enabled following warning is seen > while resuming the device. > > BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at > .../drivers/base/power/runtime.c:923 > in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 128, pid: 12, name: kworker/0:1 > [] (unwind_backtrace+0x0/0x120) from > [] (__pm_runtime_suspend+0x34/0xa0) from > [] (blk_post_runtime_resume+0x4c/0x5c) from > [] (scsi_runtime_resume+0x90/0xb4) from > [] (__rpm_callback+0x30/0x58) from > [] (rpm_callback+0x18/0x28) from > [] (rpm_resume+0x3dc/0x540) from > [] (pm_runtime_work+0x8c/0x98) from > [] (process_one_work+0x238/0x3e4) from > [] (worker_thread+0x1ac/0x2ac) from > [] (kthread+0x88/0x94) from > [] (kernel_thread_exit+0x0/0x8) > > Fix this by releasing spin_lock_irq() before calling > pm_runtime_autosuspend() in blk_post_runtime_resume(). > > --- a/block/blk-core.c > +++ b/block/blk-core.c > @@ -3159,16 +3159,18 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(blk_pre_runtime_resume); > */ > void blk_post_runtime_resume(struct request_queue *q, int err) > { > - spin_lock_irq(q->queue_lock); > if (!err) { > + spin_lock_irq(q->queue_lock); > q->rpm_status = RPM_ACTIVE; > __blk_run_queue(q); > pm_runtime_mark_last_busy(q->dev); > + spin_unlock_irq(q->queue_lock); > pm_runtime_autosuspend(q->dev); > } else { > + spin_lock_irq(q->queue_lock); > q->rpm_status = RPM_SUSPENDED; > + spin_unlock_irq(q->queue_lock); > } > - spin_unlock_irq(q->queue_lock); > } > EXPORT_SYMBOL(blk_post_runtime_resume); > #endif I suppose we can do this cleanly enough: --- a/block/blk-core.c~block-fix-possible-sleep-in-invalid-context-fix +++ a/block/blk-core.c @@ -3159,15 +3159,14 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(blk_pre_runtime_resume); */ void blk_post_runtime_resume(struct request_queue *q, int err) { + spin_lock_irq(q->queue_lock); if (!err) { - spin_lock_irq(q->queue_lock); q->rpm_status = RPM_ACTIVE; __blk_run_queue(q); pm_runtime_mark_last_busy(q->dev); spin_unlock_irq(q->queue_lock); pm_request_autosuspend(q->dev); } else { - spin_lock_irq(q->queue_lock); q->rpm_status = RPM_SUSPENDED; spin_unlock_irq(q->queue_lock); } _ I wonder if we actually need locking around that second write to q->rpm_status. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/