Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1756158AbbLQLU4 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 17 Dec 2015 06:20:56 -0500
Received: from protonic.xs4all.nl ([83.163.252.89]:21377 "EHLO
	protonic.xs4all.nl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1753423AbbLQLUz (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 17 Dec 2015 06:20:55 -0500
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2015 12:20:53 +0100
From: David Jander <david@protonic.nl>
To: Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de>
Cc: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org, Pierre Ossman <pierre@ossman.eu>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: SDHCI long sleep with interrupts off
Message-ID: <20151217122053.036daf37@archvile>
In-Reply-To: <1450350190.3163.93.camel@pengutronix.de>
References: <20151217112814.6250a3b9@archvile>
	<1450350190.3163.93.camel@pengutronix.de>
Organization: Protonic Holland
X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.11.1 (GTK+ 2.24.27; 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: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 4253
Lines: 116


Hi Lucas,

Thanks for reacting.

On Thu, 17 Dec 2015 12:03:10 +0100
Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de> wrote:

> Am Donnerstag, den 17.12.2015, 11:28 +0100 schrieb David Jander:
> > Hi all, 
> > 
> > I was investigating the source of abnormal irq-latency spikes on an i.MX6
> > (ARM) board, and discovered this:
> > 
> > # tracer: preemptirqsoff
> > #
> > # preemptirqsoff latency trace v1.1.5 on 4.4.0-rc4+
> > # --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > # latency: 2068 us, #4/4, CPU#0 | (M:preempt VP:0, KP:0, SP:0 HP:0 #P:1)
> > #    -----------------
> > #    | task: mmcqd/0-92 (uid:0 nice:0 policy:0 rt_prio:0)
> > #    -----------------
> > #  => started at: _raw_spin_lock_irqsave
> > #  => ended at:   _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore
> > #
> > #
> > #                  _------=> CPU#            
> > #                 / _-----=> irqs-off        
> > #                | / _----=> need-resched    
> > #                || / _---=> hardirq/softirq 
> > #                ||| / _--=> preempt-depth   
> > #                |||| /     delay            
> > #  cmd     pid   ||||| time  |   caller      
> > #     \   /      |||||  \    |   /         
> >  mmcqd/0-92      0d...    1us#: _raw_spin_lock_irqsave
> >  mmcqd/0-92      0.n.1 2066us : _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore
> >  mmcqd/0-92      0.n.1 2070us+: trace_preempt_on
> > <-_raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore mmcqd/0-92      0.n.1 2107us : <stack trace>
> >  => sdhci_runtime_resume_host
> >  => __rpm_callback
> >  => rpm_callback
> >  => rpm_resume
> >  => __pm_runtime_resume
> >  => __mmc_claim_host
> >  => mmc_blk_issue_rq
> >  => mmc_queue_thread
> >  => kthread
> >  => ret_from_fork
> > 
> > 2 ms with interrupts disabled!!! To much dismay, I later discovered that
> > this isn't even the worst case scenario. I also discovered that this has
> > been in the kernel for a long time without a fix (I have tested from 3.17
> > to 4.4-rc4). There has been an attempt by someone to address this back in
> > 2010, but apparently it never hit mainline.
> > Going through the code in sdhci.c, I found this troublesome code-path:
> > 
> > sdhci_do_set_ios() {
> > 	spin_lock_irqsave(&host->lock, flags);
> > 	...
> > 	sdhci_reinit() --> sdhci_init() --> sdhci_do_reset() -->
> > 		host->ops->reset() --> sdhci_reset()	
> > 	...
> > 	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&host->lock, flags);
> > }
> > 
> > And in sdhci_reset(), which may be called with held spinlock:
> > 
> > 	...
> > 	/* Wait max 100 ms */
> > 	timeout = 100;
> > 
> > 	/* hw clears the bit when it's done */
> > 	while (sdhci_readb(host, SDHCI_SOFTWARE_RESET) & mask) {
> > 		if (timeout == 0) {
> > 			pr_err("%s: Reset 0x%x never completed.\n",
> > 				mmc_hostname(host->mmc), (int)mask);
> > 			sdhci_dumpregs(host);
> > 			return;
> > 		}
> > 		timeout--;
> > 		mdelay(1);
> > 	}
> > 
> > I am wondering: There either must be a reason this hasn't been fixed in
> > such a long time, or I am not understanding this correctly, so please
> > enlighten me. Before trying a cowboy attempt at "fixing" this, I'd really
> > like to know why am I seeing this?
> > I mean... how can such a problem get unnoticed and unfixed for so long?
> > Will an attempt at fixing this issue even be accepted?
> > 
> I would like to see the sdhci spinlock killed and replaced by a mutex
> for exactly this reason.
> 
> That said, your problem is card polling, when no card is present in the
> slot. This is most probably caused by CD gpios having the wrong
> polarity.

... or not having a CD pin at all.
I am using an embedded eMMC chip and a uSD card inserted into a slot. The card
is present and also detected as such. If I never access the card, I see no
spikes (filesystem is mounted but not accessed). If I try to read a file or
directory I get the above trace.
OTOH, if I disable PM functionality in the kernel, the spike is gone, and
worst-case latency is in the 300us range, so I don't think this is related to
card polling.

Best regards,

-- 
David Jander
Protonic Holland.
--
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/