Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
From:   "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
To:     Jon Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com>
Cc:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
        Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
        Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de>,
        Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@samsung.com>,
        Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
        Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
        Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
        Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>,
        Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>,
        linux-tegra <linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] driver core: Fix possible supplier PM-usage counter imbalance
Date:   Mon, 18 Feb 2019 23:14:35 +0100
Message-ID: <1643324.bcmPelzAHY@aspire.rjw.lan>
In-Reply-To: <6ee66fc6-cba5-7aea-0e92-3380544c1a94@nvidia.com>
References: <5510642.nRbR3bcduN@aspire.rjw.lan> <CAJZ5v0gywb2jE-FRowxuosucNVqQ4iLLTCFte4hN_CELF9rHRA@mail.gmail.com> <6ee66fc6-cba5-7aea-0e92-3380544c1a94@nvidia.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Monday, February 18, 2019 2:02:50 PM CET Jon Hunter wrote:
> 
> On 18/02/2019 12:12, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >  On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 5:44 PM Jon Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 15/02/2019 14:37, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> >>> On Fri, 15 Feb 2019 at 12:00, Jon Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi Rafael,
> >>>>
> >>>> On 12/02/2019 12:08, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >>>>> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> If a stateless device link to a certain supplier with
> >>>>> DL_FLAG_PM_RUNTIME set in the flags is added and then removed by the
> >>>>> consumer driver's probe callback, the supplier's PM-runtime usage
> >>>>> counter will be nonzero after that which effectively causes the
> >>>>> supplier to remain "always on" going forward.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Namely, device_link_add() called to add the link invokes
> >>>>> device_link_rpm_prepare() which notices that the consumer driver is
> >>>>> probing, so it increments the supplier's PM-runtime usage counter
> >>>>> with the assumption that the link will stay around until
> >>>>> pm_runtime_put_suppliers() is called by driver_probe_device(),
> >>>>> but if the link goes away before that point, the supplier's
> >>>>> PM-runtime usage counter will remain nonzero.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> To prevent that from happening, first rework pm_runtime_get_suppliers()
> >>>>> and pm_runtime_put_suppliers() to use the rpm_active refounts of device
> >>>>> links and make the latter only drop rpm_active and the supplier's
> >>>>> PM-runtime usage counter for each link by one, unless rpm_active is
> >>>>> one already for it.  Next, modify device_link_add() to bump up the
> >>>>> new link's rpm_active refcount and the suppliers PM-runtime usage
> >>>>> counter by two, to prevent pm_runtime_put_suppliers(), if it is
> >>>>> called subsequently, from suspending the supplier prematurely (in
> >>>>> case its PM-runtime usage counter goes down to 0 in there).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Due to the way rpm_put_suppliers() works, this change does not
> >>>>> affect runtime suspend of the consumer ends of new device links (or,
> >>>>> generally, device links for which DL_FLAG_PM_RUNTIME has just been
> >>>>> set).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Fixes: e2f3cd831a28 ("driver core: Fix handling of runtime PM flags in device_link_add()")
> >>>>> Reported-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>
> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> >>>>> ---
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Note that the issue had been there before commit e2f3cd831a28, but it was
> >>>>> overlooked by that commit and this change is a fix on top of it, so make
> >>>>> the Fixes: tag point to commit e2f3cd831a28 (instead of an earlier one
> >>>>> that the patch will not be applicable to).
> >>>> I noticed that yesterday's and today's -next were no longer booting on
> >>>> one of our Tegra boards (Tegra210 Jetson TX2) because networking is
> >>>> failing. The ethernet chip is a USB device and looking at the bootlogs I
> >>>> can see that the Tegra XHCI driver is failing ...
> >>>>
> >>>>  tegra-xusb 70090000.usb: xHCI host controller not responding, assume dead
> >>>>  tegra-xusb 70090000.usb: HC died; cleaning up
> >>>>
> >>>> The Tegra XHCI driver uses multiple power-domains and uses
> >>>> device_link_add() to attach them. So now I am wondering if there is
> >>>> something that we have got wrong in our implementation. However, I don't
> >>>> see the device being probed deferred on boot or anything like that.
> >>>>
> >>>> The driver in question is drivers/usb/host/xhci-tegra.c and we add the
> >>>> links in the function tegra_xusb_powerdomain_init() which is before RPM
> >>>> is enabled. Let me know if you have any thoughts.
> >>>
> >>> If you are willing to help debugging then I am offering my assistance.
> >>>
> >>> I would start by enabling CONFIG_PM_ADVANCED_DEBUG, which gives you
> >>> some more information about the runtime PM state of the device, like
> >>> the usage count for example.
> >>> I would also add a couple of prints in
> >>> tegra_xusb_runtime_suspend|resume() and in the ->power_on|off()
> >>> callbacks for the corresponding genpds, to see when those gets called.
> >>
> >> From the bootlog I see ...
> >>
> >> [    4.445827] tegra_xusb_runtime_resume-788
> >> [    4.508799] tegra-xusb 70090000.usb: Firmware timestamp: 2015-08-10 09:47:54 UTC
> > 
> > This message comes from tegra_xusb_load_firmware() in
> > tegra_xusb_probe() which is after the pm_runtime_get_sync().
> > 
> > If the device was PM-runtime-suspended before, the
> > pm_runtime_get_sync() will runtime-resume and reference-count the
> > suppliers in addition to resuming the device.  In that case
> > pm_runtime_put_suppliers() will suspend the suppliers, so there is a
> > bug in there.
> > 
> > What happens is that the links are new when pm_runtime_get_sync() runs
> > and so their rpm_active refcounts are one.  After the
> > pm_runtime_get_sync() they are two and pm_runtime_put_suppliers() will
> > drop them by one and drop the PM-runtime usage counter of each of them
> > by one, so they will become zero and the suppliers will suspend.
> > 
> > Passing DL_FLAG_RPM_ACTIVE to device_link_add() should help, but IMO
> > things should also work without that.
> 
> I can confirm that DL_FLAG_RPM_ACTIVE does indeed work. I assume though
> this would prevent the suppliers from ever being suspended,

No, it wouldn't.  It only prevents the supplier from suspending as long as
the consumer remains active.

In your case it shouldn't matter (it only matters because of the bug in
the $subject patch), because the consumer is suspended to start with.

Had it been active initially, though, passing DL_FLAG_RPM_ACTIVE to
device_link_add() would have been the only way to to force the supplier to
remain active accross the return from consumer probe until the consumer is
suspended.

> which maybe
> we will want to do eventually.
> 
> >> [    4.516223] tegra-xusb 70090000.usb: xHCI Host Controller
> >> [    4.521622] tegra-xusb 70090000.usb: new USB bus registered, assigned bus number 1
> > 
> > This comes from usb_add_hcd()
> > 
> >> [    4.530087] tegra-xusb 70090000.usb: hcc params 0x0184f525 hci version 0x100 quirks 0x0000000000010010
> >> [    4.539398] tegra-xusb 70090000.usb: irq 69, io mem 0x70090000
> >> [    4.553671] tegra-xusb 70090000.usb: xHCI Host Controller
> >> [    4.559064] tegra-xusb 70090000.usb: new USB bus registered, assigned bus number 2
> > 
> > Like this.
> > 
> >> [    4.566622] tegra-xusb 70090000.usb: Host supports USB 3.0  SuperSpeed
> > 
> > And this if from xhci_gen_setup(), so probe returns around this point.
> > 
> >> [    4.595393] tegra-pmc: tegra_genpd_power_off-673: xusbc
> >> [    4.600672] tegra-pmc: tegra_genpd_power_off-673: xusba
> > 
> > And this appears to be done by pm_runtime_put_suppliers().
> > 
> > Hmm, I need to think how to fix this.  Maybe we'll need to revert
> > $subject patch and do something else, we'll see (later today).
> 
> OK, thanks. Let me know if there is anything else I can test.

Please test https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10818923/

Cheers,
Rafael