On 11/12/19 10:37 PM, Kuninori Morimoto wrote:
Hi Pierre-Louis
Thank you for your report
+ for_each_rtd_components(rtd, rtdcom, component) {
+ pr_err("plb: %s processing component\n", __func__);
+ if (!component)
+ pr_err("plb: %s component is NULL\n", __func__);
Could you perhaps add traces of which components are being accessed at
each stage? We might want to go through and just add something like
that in the code anyway to help figure things out.
I tried to add more traces but couldn't triangulate on a clear issue,
and the traces have an Heisenbug effect.
So I switched to higher-level code analysis: it turns out that
soc_dai_link_remove() routine is called from both topology and on card
cleanup.
The patch 06/19 in this series essentially forces the pcm_runtimes to
be freed in both cases, so possibly twice for topology-managed
dailinks - or using information that's been freed already.
I 'fixed' this by adding an additional parameter to avoid doing the
pcm runtime free from the topology (as was done before), and the
kernel oops goes away. My tests have been running for 45mn now, when
without change I get a kernel oops in less than 10-20 cycles (but
still more than apparently our CI tracks, something to improve).
I pushed the code on GitHub to check if there are any negative points
reported by the Intel CI, should be complete shortly:
https://github.com/thesofproject/linux/pull/1469
I am not sure the suggested fix is correct, I don't fully get what the
topology and card cleanups should do and how the work is split, if at
all.
BTW, I guess your kernel is appling this patch,
but, is it correct ?
df95a16d2a9626dcfc3f2b3671c9b91fa076c997
("ASoC: soc-core: fix RIP warning on card removal")
Sorry morimoto-san, I am not getting the question.
Are you asking if the patch is correct?
Or are you asking if the kernel used for this test include this patch?
The answer is yes, this patch ("ASoC: soc-core: fix RIP warning on card
removal") was merged by Mark and the SOF tree does use it, since we
follow Mark's tree.
If so, I think I could understand the issue.
But, before explaining detail,
I want to confirm that my solution is correct or not first.
Can you please check attached patch ?
Takashi's feedback seems to hint at problems with this patch, so will
wait for further instructions here if you want me to test.
Thanks!
Then, please remove above RIP warning patch.
It is not clean patch, but OK to confirming, so far.
I think
- no kernel Oops
- no RIP warning
Thank you for your help !!
Best regards
---
Kuninori Morimoto
_______________________________________________
Alsa-devel mailing list
Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
_______________________________________________
Alsa-devel mailing list
Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
