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;
Message-ID: <976641f42211af23d90464d0c4841cc40740b0d7.camel@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] scsi: ufs: Protect PM ops and err_handler from user
 access through sysfs
From:   Bean Huo <huobean@gmail.com>
To:     Can Guo <cang@codeaurora.org>
Cc:     asutoshd@codeaurora.org, nguyenb@codeaurora.org,
        hongwus@codeaurora.org, ziqichen@codeaurora.org,
        rnayak@codeaurora.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
        kernel-team@android.com, saravanak@google.com, salyzyn@google.com,
        rjw@rjwysocki.net, Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@samsung.com>,
        Avri Altman <avri.altman@wdc.com>,
        "James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@linux.ibm.com>,
        "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
        Stanley Chu <stanley.chu@mediatek.com>,
        Bean Huo <beanhuo@micron.com>,
        Nitin Rawat <nitirawa@codeaurora.org>,
        Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
        Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>,
        Satya Tangirala <satyat@google.com>,
        open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Date:   Mon, 11 Jan 2021 09:23:35 +0100
In-Reply-To: <fa0e976387070c64752c972d32ce15df@codeaurora.org>
References: <1609595975-12219-1-git-send-email-cang@codeaurora.org>
         <1609595975-12219-3-git-send-email-cang@codeaurora.org>
         <80a15afab8024d0b61d312b57585c9322ac91958.camel@gmail.com>
         <7d49c1dfc3f648c484076f3c3a7f4e1e@codeaurora.org>
         <1514403adf486ac8069253c09f45b021bad32e00.camel@gmail.com>
         <f814b71d1d4ea87a72df4851a8190807@codeaurora.org>
         <cb388d8ea15b2c80a072dec74d9ededecb183a08.camel@gmail.com>
         <e69bd5a6b73d5c652130bf4fa077aac0@codeaurora.org>
         <606774efd4d89f0ea78cefeb428cc9e1@codeaurora.org>
         <146b46a5c38f4582a9a8e6df1d87cdfc0684f549.camel@gmail.com>
         <fa0e976387070c64752c972d32ce15df@codeaurora.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, 2021-01-11 at 09:27 +0800, Can Guo wrote:
> > 
> > If accessing sysfs nodes, which triggers a UFS UPIU request to
> > read/write UFS device descriptors during shutdown flow, there is
> > only
> > one issue that sysfs node access failure since UFS device and LINK
> > has
> > been shutdown. Strictly speaking, the failure comes after
> > ufshcd_set_dev_pwr_mode().
> > 
> >     __ufshcd_query_descriptor: opcode 0x01 for idn 0 failed, index
> > 0,
> > err = -11
> 
> You misunderstood it again. You are expecting a simple query cmd
> error.
> But what really matters are NoC issues[1] and OCP[2]. And
> while/after 
> UFS
> shutting down, either of them may happen.
> 
> [1] When a un-clocked register access issue happens, we call it a
> NoC 
> issue,
> meaning you are tring to access a register when clocks are disabled. 
> This
> leads to system CRASH.
> 

OK, let it simple, share this kind of crash log becuase of access sysfs
node in the shutdown flow.


> [2] OCP is over current protection. While UFS shutting down, you may
> have put UFS regulators to LPM. After that, if you are still trying
> to
> talk to UFS, OCP can happen on VCCQ/VCCQ2. This leads to system
> CRASH 
> too.

the same as above, share the crash log.

> 
> > 
> > Since the shutdown is oneway process, this failure is not big
> > issue. If
> > you meant to avoid this failure for unsafe shutdown, I agree with
> > you,
> > But for the race issue, I don't know.
> > 
> 
> Easy for you to say. System crash is a big issue to any SoC vendors
> I 
> belive.
> 

indeed, crash is serious issue, share the log.


Thanks,
Bean


> Can Guo.