[PATCH] [RFC] soc: imx: imx8m-blk-ctrl: Split clock prepare from clock enable in the domain
Laurent Pinchart
laurent.pinchart at ideasonboard.com
Wed Nov 9 04:53:20 PST 2022
Hi Marek,
On Wed, Nov 09, 2022 at 01:28:03AM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
> On 10/25/22 02:25, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 24, 2022 at 05:09:47PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> >> It is possible for clk_disable_unused() to trigger lockdep warning
> >> regarding lock ordering in this driver. This happens in case of the
> >> following conditions:
> >>
> >> A) clock core clk_disable_unused() triggers the following sequence in a
> >> driver which also uses blkctrl domain:
> >> - clk_prepare_lock() -> obtains clock core prepare_lock
> >> - pm_runtime_get*() -> obtains &blk_ctrl_genpd_lock_class
> >>
> >> B) driver powers up a power domain and triggers the following sequence
> >> in blkctrl:
> >> - pm_runtime_get_sync() -> obtains &blk_ctrl_genpd_lock_class
> >> - clk_bulk_prepare_enable() -> obtains clock core prepare_lock
> >>
> >> This can lead to a deadlock in case A and B runs on separate CPUs.
> >>
> >> To avoid the deadlock, split clk_*prepare() from clk_*enable() and
> >> call the former before pm_runtime_get_sync(). This way, the blkctrl
> >> driver always claims the prepare_lock before blk_ctrl_genpd_lock_class
> >> and the deadlock is avoided.
> >
> > I'm afraid I'm still getting occasional warnings from lockdep :-( This
> > one happened at boot time:
> >
> > [ 17.837243]
> > [ 17.837254] ======================================================
> > [ 17.837256] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
> > [ 17.837260] 6.1.0-rc2-00199-gd504fb27855a-dirty #301 Not tainted
> > [ 17.837265] ------------------------------------------------------
> > [ 17.837267] kworker/u8:6/152 is trying to acquire lock:
> > [ 17.837273] ffff000000eab6f0 (&blk_ctrl_genpd_lock_class){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: genpd_lock_mtx+0x20/0x30
> > [ 17.837300]
> > [ 17.837300] but task is already holding lock:
> > [ 17.837302] ffff800009c1e5e8 (prepare_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: clk_prepare_lock+0x34/0xb0
> > [ 17.837321]
> > [ 17.837321] which lock already depends on the new lock.
> > [ 17.837321]
> > [ 17.837323]
> > [ 17.837323] the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
> > [ 17.837326]
> > [ 17.837326] -> #1 (prepare_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}:
> > [ 17.837337] lock_acquire+0x68/0x90
> > [ 17.837345] __mutex_lock+0x8c/0x420
> > [ 17.837354] mutex_lock_nested+0x34/0x40
> > [ 17.837360] clk_prepare_lock+0x54/0xb0
> > [ 17.837367] clk_unprepare+0x2c/0x50
> > [ 17.837373] clk_bulk_unprepare+0x44/0x60
> > [ 17.837380] imx8mp_blk_ctrl_power_off+0xb4/0x100
> > [ 17.837386] _genpd_power_off+0x9c/0x180
> > [ 17.837392] genpd_power_off.part.0.isra.0+0x130/0x2a0
> > [ 17.837399] genpd_power_off_work_fn+0x6c/0x90
> > [ 17.837405] process_one_work+0x294/0x6b0
> > [ 17.837412] worker_thread+0x7c/0x450
> > [ 17.837416] kthread+0x114/0x120
> > [ 17.837424] ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20
> > [ 17.837431]
> > [ 17.837431] -> #0 (&blk_ctrl_genpd_lock_class){+.+.}-{3:3}:
> > [ 17.837442] __lock_acquire+0x1148/0x1910
> > [ 17.837448] lock_acquire.part.0+0xec/0x260
> > [ 17.837454] lock_acquire+0x68/0x90
> > [ 17.837459] __mutex_lock+0x8c/0x420
> > [ 17.837466] mutex_lock_nested+0x34/0x40
> > [ 17.837472] genpd_lock_mtx+0x20/0x30
> > [ 17.837478] genpd_runtime_resume+0xfc/0x2e0
> > [ 17.837484] __rpm_callback+0x50/0x1b0
> > [ 17.837492] rpm_callback+0x74/0x80
> > [ 17.837499] rpm_resume+0x434/0x6e0
> > [ 17.837505] __pm_runtime_resume+0x54/0xa0
> > [ 17.837512] clk_pm_runtime_get.part.0.isra.0+0x24/0xa0
> > [ 17.837518] clk_core_set_rate_nolock+0xbc/0x2b0
> > [ 17.837524] clk_set_rate+0x40/0xa0
> > [ 17.837529] lcdif_crtc_atomic_enable+0x98/0x880 [imx_lcdif]
> > [ 17.837544] drm_atomic_helper_commit_modeset_enables+0xac/0x2b0
> > [ 17.837551] drm_atomic_helper_commit_tail_rpm+0x58/0xb0
> > [ 17.837558] commit_tail+0xac/0x1a0
> > [ 17.837563] drm_atomic_helper_commit+0x1a0/0x1c0
> > [ 17.837569] drm_atomic_commit+0x94/0x130
> > [ 17.837574] drm_client_modeset_commit_atomic+0x230/0x2a0
> > [ 17.837582] drm_client_modeset_commit_locked+0x68/0x1d0
> > [ 17.837588] drm_client_modeset_commit+0x38/0x60
> > [ 17.837594] drm_fb_helper_set_par+0xd4/0x130
> > [ 17.837600] fbcon_init+0x3d4/0x540
> > [ 17.837606] visual_init+0xb8/0x110
> > [ 17.837613] do_bind_con_driver.isra.0+0x1c8/0x3a0
> > [ 17.837620] do_take_over_console+0x148/0x200
> > [ 17.837627] do_fbcon_takeover+0x74/0xf0
> > [ 17.837632] fbcon_fb_registered+0x18c/0x200
> > [ 17.837637] register_framebuffer+0x1bc/0x2b0
> > [ 17.837645] __drm_fb_helper_initial_config_and_unlock+0x338/0x5c0
> > [ 17.837650] drm_fbdev_client_hotplug+0xd8/0x1c0
> > [ 17.837656] drm_fbdev_generic_setup+0xbc/0x1b0
> > [ 17.837661] lcdif_probe+0x2b0/0x310 [imx_lcdif]
> > [ 17.837672] platform_probe+0x70/0xf0
> > [ 17.837678] really_probe+0xc8/0x3e0
> > [ 17.837685] __driver_probe_device+0x84/0x190
> > [ 17.837692] driver_probe_device+0x44/0x120
> > [ 17.837699] __device_attach_driver+0xc4/0x160
> > [ 17.837707] bus_for_each_drv+0x80/0xe0
> > [ 17.837713] __device_attach+0xb0/0x1f0
> > [ 17.837720] device_initial_probe+0x1c/0x30
> > [ 17.837727] bus_probe_device+0xa4/0xb0
> > [ 17.837734] deferred_probe_work_func+0xac/0x100
> > [ 17.837740] process_one_work+0x294/0x6b0
> > [ 17.837746] worker_thread+0x7c/0x450
> > [ 17.837751] kthread+0x114/0x120
> > [ 17.837758] ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20
> > [ 17.837764]
> > [ 17.837764] other info that might help us debug this:
> > [ 17.837764]
> > [ 17.837766] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
> > [ 17.837766]
> > [ 17.837768] CPU0 CPU1
> > [ 17.837770] ---- ----
> > [ 17.837772] lock(prepare_lock);
> > [ 17.837779] lock(&blk_ctrl_genpd_lock_class);
> > [ 17.837785] lock(prepare_lock);
> > [ 17.837790] lock(&blk_ctrl_genpd_lock_class);
> > [ 17.837796]
> > [ 17.837796] *** DEADLOCK ***
> > [ 17.837796]
> > [ 17.837799] 11 locks held by kworker/u8:6/152:
> > [ 17.837803] #0: ffff000000040938 ((wq_completion)events_unbound){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: process_one_work+0x1fc/0x6b0
> > [ 17.837821] #1: ffff80000b74bdd0 (deferred_probe_work){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: process_one_work+0x1fc/0x6b0
> > [ 17.837838] #2: ffff0000003f58f8 (&dev->mutex){....}-{3:3}, at: __device_attach+0x40/0x1f0
> > [ 17.837856] #3: ffff800009c1ddc0 (registration_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: register_framebuffer+0x4c/0x2b0
> > [ 17.837875] #4: ffff800009ae4e68 (console_lock){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: fbcon_fb_registered+0x1f8/0x200
> > [ 17.837892] #5: ffff000002f1ee78 (&helper->lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: drm_fb_helper_set_par+0x98/0x130
> > [ 17.837909] #6: ffff0000038611a8 (&dev->master_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: drm_master_internal_acquire+0x2c/0x70
> > [ 17.837928] #7: ffff000002f1ec98 (&client->modeset_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: drm_client_modeset_commit_locked+0x34/0x1d0
> > [ 17.837947] #8: ffff80000b74b690 (crtc_ww_class_acquire){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: drm_client_modeset_commit_atomic+0x50/0x2a0
> > [ 17.837964] #9: ffff000003863138 (crtc_ww_class_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: drm_modeset_lock+0x48/0x130
> > [ 17.837984] #10: ffff800009c1e5e8 (prepare_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: clk_prepare_lock+0x34/0xb0
> > [ 17.838003]
> > [ 17.838003] stack backtrace:
> > [ 17.838007] CPU: 1 PID: 152 Comm: kworker/u8:6 Not tainted 6.1.0-rc2-00199-gd504fb27855a-dirty #301
> > [ 17.838013] Hardware name: Polyhex Debix Model A i.MX8MPlus board (DT)
> > [ 17.838018] Workqueue: events_unbound deferred_probe_work_func
> > [ 17.838029] Call trace:
> > [ 17.838031] dump_backtrace+0xe4/0x140
> > [ 17.838042] show_stack+0x20/0x50
> > [ 17.838049] dump_stack_lvl+0x9c/0xd8
> > [ 17.838055] dump_stack+0x18/0x34
> > [ 17.838060] print_circular_bug+0x1f8/0x200
> > [ 17.838066] check_noncircular+0x160/0x180
> > [ 17.838072] __lock_acquire+0x1148/0x1910
> > [ 17.838078] lock_acquire.part.0+0xec/0x260
> > [ 17.838084] lock_acquire+0x68/0x90
> > [ 17.838089] __mutex_lock+0x8c/0x420
> > [ 17.838098] mutex_lock_nested+0x34/0x40
> > [ 17.838104] genpd_lock_mtx+0x20/0x30
> > [ 17.838110] genpd_runtime_resume+0xfc/0x2e0
> > [ 17.838117] __rpm_callback+0x50/0x1b0
> > [ 17.838125] rpm_callback+0x74/0x80
> > [ 17.838132] rpm_resume+0x434/0x6e0
> > [ 17.838138] __pm_runtime_resume+0x54/0xa0
> > [ 17.838145] clk_pm_runtime_get.part.0.isra.0+0x24/0xa0
> > [ 17.838150] clk_core_set_rate_nolock+0xbc/0x2b0
> > [ 17.838157] clk_set_rate+0x40/0xa0
> > [ 17.838162] lcdif_crtc_atomic_enable+0x98/0x880 [imx_lcdif]
> > [ 17.838175] drm_atomic_helper_commit_modeset_enables+0xac/0x2b0
> > [ 17.838182] drm_atomic_helper_commit_tail_rpm+0x58/0xb0
> > [ 17.838188] commit_tail+0xac/0x1a0
> > [ 17.838194] drm_atomic_helper_commit+0x1a0/0x1c0
> > [ 17.838200] drm_atomic_commit+0x94/0x130
> > [ 17.838205] drm_client_modeset_commit_atomic+0x230/0x2a0
> > [ 17.838212] drm_client_modeset_commit_locked+0x68/0x1d0
> > [ 17.838218] drm_client_modeset_commit+0x38/0x60
> > [ 17.838224] drm_fb_helper_set_par+0xd4/0x130
> > [ 17.838230] fbcon_init+0x3d4/0x540
> > [ 17.838235] visual_init+0xb8/0x110
> > [ 17.838243] do_bind_con_driver.isra.0+0x1c8/0x3a0
> > [ 17.838250] do_take_over_console+0x148/0x200
> > [ 17.838257] do_fbcon_takeover+0x74/0xf0
> > [ 17.838262] fbcon_fb_registered+0x18c/0x200
> > [ 17.838268] register_framebuffer+0x1bc/0x2b0
> > [ 17.838275] __drm_fb_helper_initial_config_and_unlock+0x338/0x5c0
> > [ 17.838282] drm_fbdev_client_hotplug+0xd8/0x1c0
> > [ 17.838288] drm_fbdev_generic_setup+0xbc/0x1b0
> > [ 17.838293] lcdif_probe+0x2b0/0x310 [imx_lcdif]
> > [ 17.838304] platform_probe+0x70/0xf0
> > [ 17.838309] really_probe+0xc8/0x3e0
> > [ 17.838316] __driver_probe_device+0x84/0x190
> > [ 17.838323] driver_probe_device+0x44/0x120
> > [ 17.838330] __device_attach_driver+0xc4/0x160
> > [ 17.838338] bus_for_each_drv+0x80/0xe0
> > [ 17.838344] __device_attach+0xb0/0x1f0
> > [ 17.838351] device_initial_probe+0x1c/0x30
> > [ 17.838358] bus_probe_device+0xa4/0xb0
> > [ 17.838365] deferred_probe_work_func+0xac/0x100
> > [ 17.838372] process_one_work+0x294/0x6b0
> > [ 17.838378] worker_thread+0x7c/0x450
> > [ 17.838383] kthread+0x114/0x120
> > [ 17.838390] ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20
>
> Let's see if this works any better:
>
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-pm/list/?series=693012
I've added that to my tree, but won't be able to test it this week as
I'm travelling and don't have access to the necessary hardware. I'll try
to report test results next week.
--
Regards,
Laurent Pinchart
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list