Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Mon, 7 Dec 2020 11:46:54 +0530
From:   Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
To:     Rob Clark <robdclark@gmail.com>
Cc:     Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
        dri-devel <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
        Rob Clark <robdclark@chromium.org>,
        Sean Paul <sean@poorly.run>, David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>,
        "open list:DRM DRIVER FOR MSM ADRENO GPU" 
        <linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>,
        "open list:DRM DRIVER FOR MSM ADRENO GPU" 
        <freedreno@lists.freedesktop.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "Menon, Nishanth" <nm@ti.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 07/22] drm/msm: Do rpm get sooner in the submit path
Message-ID: <20201207061654.btlgobmsljdqbb2u@vireshk-i7>
References: <20201027113532.nriqqws7gdcu5su6@vireshk-i7>
 <20201103054715.4l5j57pyjz6zd6ed@vireshk-i7>
 <CAF6AEGtgUVXm6Wwod0FC38g91Q8CotLFSoC4NmXx7GzcA=1mOA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20201104030353.ny7zvakgb4fsye6r@vireshk-i7>
 <CAF6AEGv215ixcAWmaOWs7UKAqmbMs=aFyTBBYLU-bt8XBnWb7g@mail.gmail.com>
 <20201106071621.j732gt4nqifjrccd@vireshk-i7>
 <CAF6AEGt_wbWuQA7gBw4yn4f2x0SVbfub4eRDX59PCvnd_0uFxg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20201118052829.ugt7i7ac6eqsj4l6@vireshk-i7>
 <CAF6AEGv=-h7GFj5LR97FkeBBn+gk6TNS5hZkwBwufpE4yO7GyA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20201119060528.qscedvc4jlmxakqo@vireshk-i7>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20201119060528.qscedvc4jlmxakqo@vireshk-i7>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716-391-311a52
Precedence: bulk

On 19-11-20, 11:35, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 18-11-20, 08:53, Rob Clark wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 9:28 PM Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 17-11-20, 09:02, Rob Clark wrote:
> > > > With that on top of the previous patch,
> > >
> > > Don't you still have this ? Which fixed the lockdep in the remove path.
> > >
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20201022080644.2ck4okrxygmkuatn@vireshk-i7/
> > >
> > > To make it clear you need these patches to fix the OPP stuff:
> > >
> > > //From 5.10-rc3 (the one from the above link).
> > > commit e0df59de670b ("opp: Reduce the size of critical section in _opp_table_kref_release()")
> 
> This fixes debugfs stuff while the OPP table is removed.
> 
> > > //Below two from linux-next
> > > commit ef43f01ac069 ("opp: Always add entries in dev_list with opp_table->lock held")
> > > commit 27c09484dd3d ("opp: Allocate the OPP table outside of opp_table_lock")
> 
> This fixes debugfs stuff while the OPP table is added.
> 
> > > This matches the diff I gave you earlier.
> > >
> > 
> > no, I did not have all three, only "opp: Allocate the OPP table
> > outside of opp_table_lock" plus the fixup.  But with all three:
> 
> And looking at the lockdep you gave now, it looks like we have a
> problem with OPP table's internal lock (opp_table->lock) as well apart
> from the global opp_table_lock.
> 
> I wish there was a way for me to reproduce the lockdep :(
> 
> I know this is exhausting for both of us and I really want to be over
> with it as soon as possible, this really should be the last patch
> here, please try this along with other two. This fixes the debugfs
> thing while the OPPs in the OPP table are removed (they are already
> added without a lock around debugfs stuff).
> 
> AFAIU, there is no further debugfs stuff that happens from within the
> locks and so this really should be the last patch unless I missed
> something.

Rob, were you able to test this patch ?

-- 
viresh