lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Jan]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: ufshcd_queuecommand() triggering after ufshcd_suspend()?
Hey all,

I think there are two different issues:

1. clk_gating's state(including state's trace event) and is_suspended is not
wrapped by ufshcd_is_clkgating_allowed which Hisilicon's kirin platoform
soc does not need but is set and checked in a regular path.
2. I think SCSI is necessary to block queue to stop sending to ufs after
system suspend or, add a new state for ufs like UFSHCD_STATE_SUSPENDING
or what else. hba->is_sys_suspended is too late to stop ufshcd_queuecommand

On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 06:39:56AM +0000, Avri Altman wrote:
> +Zang
>
> Thanks,
> Avri
>
>
>
> ________________________________________
> From: John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>
> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2019 1:02:21 AM
> To: Sahitya Tummala; Christoph Hellwig; Wei Li; Martin K. Petersen
> Cc: Evan Green; Avri Altman; Vijay Viswanath; lkml; linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: ufshcd_queuecommand() triggering after ufshcd_suspend()?
>
> Hey all,
> Frequently, since support for the HiKey960's UFS code landed in
> 4.19, I've noticed the following warning on reboot:
>
> [ 23.086860] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 2507 at
> drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c:2460 ufshcd_queuecommand+0x59c/0x5a8
> [ 23.096256] Modules linked in:
> [ 23.099313] CPU: 0 PID: 2507 Comm: kworker/0:1H Tainted: G S
> 5.0.0-rc1-00068-g3f81a19 #273
> [ 23.108873] Hardware name: HiKey960 (DT)
> [ 23.112802] Workqueue: kblockd blk_mq_requeue_work
> [ 23.117591] pstate: 80400005 (Nzcv daif +PAN -UAO)
> [ 23.122378] pc : ufshcd_queuecommand+0x59c/0x5a8
> [ 23.126990] lr : ufshcd_queuecommand+0x58c/0x5a8
> [ 23.131600] sp : ffffff8015e1ba80
> [ 23.134907] x29: ffffff8015e1ba80 x28: ffffffc217f94048
> [ 23.140214] x27: 0000000000000010 x26: ffffffc217a7c8b8
> [ 23.145520] x25: ffffffc217a7c000 x24: ffffffc217a7ceb0
> [ 23.150827] x23: 0000000000000000 x22: ffffffc217a7c808
> [ 23.156133] x21: ffffffc217f94120 x20: 0000000000000010
> [ 23.161440] x19: ffffff801186d000 x18: ffffff801186db08
> [ 23.166746] x17: 0000000000000000 x16: 0000000000000000
> [ 23.172053] x15: ffffff8095e1b7c7 x14: 692064616574736e
> [ 23.177360] x13: 6928204e4f5f534b x12: 4c43203d21206574
> [ 23.182666] x11: 6174732e676e6974 x10: 61675f6b6c633e2d
> [ 23.187973] x9 : 61626820646e616d x8 : 6d6f636575657571
> [ 23.193280] x7 : 0000000000000000 x6 : ffffff801186e000
> [ 23.198586] x5 : ffffff801186e270 x4 : ffffff8010096dc0
> [ 23.203894] x3 : 0000000000010000 x2 : 47dd99afde511d00
> [ 23.209201] x1 : 0000000000000000 x0 : 0000000000000000
> [ 23.214509] Call trace:
> [ 23.216952] ufshcd_queuecommand+0x59c/0x5a8
> [ 23.221220] scsi_queue_rq+0x5b4/0x880
> [ 23.224964] blk_mq_dispatch_rq_list+0xb0/0x510
> [ 23.229492] blk_mq_sched_dispatch_requests+0xf4/0x198
> [ 23.234626] __blk_mq_run_hw_queue+0xb4/0x120
> [ 23.238978] __blk_mq_delay_run_hw_queue+0x110/0x200
> [ 23.243937] blk_mq_run_hw_queue+0xb8/0x118
> [ 23.248114] blk_mq_run_hw_queues+0x58/0x78
> [ 23.252291] blk_mq_requeue_work+0x140/0x168
> [ 23.256560] process_one_work+0x158/0x468
> [ 23.260564] worker_thread+0x50/0x460
> [ 23.264222] kthread+0x104/0x130
> [ 23.267447] ret_from_fork+0x10/0x1c
> [ 23.271017] ---[ end trace 45f1ee04059cdf00 ]---
>
> Since the warning is triggering from the WARN_ON(hba->clk_gating.state
> != CLKS_ON) line, I annotated the clk_gating.state changes, and am
> seeing on reboot:
> vdc: Waited 0ms for vold
> sd 0:0:0:3: [sdd] Synchronizing SCSI cache
> sd 0:0:0:2: [sdc] Synchronizing SCSI cache
> sd 0:0:0:1: [sdb] Synchronizing SCSI cache
> sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Synchronizing SCSI cache
> ufshcd_suspend: setting clk_gating.state CLKS_OFF
> ufshcd_queuecommand hba->clk_gating.state != CLKS_ON (instead its 0)
> <warning splat>
>
> So it seems like ufshcd_suspend() is has run, but then the workqueue
> (occasionally) fires afterwards triggering the issue.
>
> Maybe should something in ufshcd_queuecommand be checking the
> clk_gating.is_suspended flag before proceeding?
>
> Other ideas? The logic all seems to be in the generic code, but I'm
> not sure if maybe the ufs-hisi.c code is mis-managing something?
>
> thanks
> -john

--
Thanks,
Zang Leigang

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-01-14 04:26    [W:0.048 / U:0.072 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site