On Mon, Nov 2, 2020 at 9:47 PM Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 27-10-20, 17:05, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > It isn't that straight forward unfortunately, we need to make sure the > > table doesn't get allocated for the same device twice, so > > find+allocate needs to happen within a locked region. > > > > I have taken, not so straight forward, approach to fixing this issue, > > lets see if this fixes it or not. > > > > -------------------------8<------------------------- > > > > diff --git a/drivers/opp/core.c b/drivers/opp/core.c > > index 4ac4e7ce6b8b..6f4a73a6391f 100644 > > --- a/drivers/opp/core.c > > +++ b/drivers/opp/core.c > > @@ -29,6 +29,8 @@ > > LIST_HEAD(opp_tables); > > /* Lock to allow exclusive modification to the device and opp lists */ > > DEFINE_MUTEX(opp_table_lock); > > +/* Flag indicating that opp_tables list is being updated at the moment */ > > +static bool opp_tables_busy; > > > > static struct opp_device *_find_opp_dev(const struct device *dev, > > struct opp_table *opp_table) > > @@ -1036,8 +1038,8 @@ static void _remove_opp_dev(struct opp_device *opp_dev, > > kfree(opp_dev); > > } > > > > -static struct opp_device *_add_opp_dev_unlocked(const struct device *dev, > > - struct opp_table *opp_table) > > +struct opp_device *_add_opp_dev(const struct device *dev, > > + struct opp_table *opp_table) > > { > > struct opp_device *opp_dev; > > > > @@ -1048,7 +1050,9 @@ static struct opp_device *_add_opp_dev_unlocked(const struct device *dev, > > /* Initialize opp-dev */ > > opp_dev->dev = dev; > > > > + mutex_lock(&opp_table->lock); > > list_add(&opp_dev->node, &opp_table->dev_list); > > + mutex_unlock(&opp_table->lock); > > > > /* Create debugfs entries for the opp_table */ > > opp_debug_register(opp_dev, opp_table); > > @@ -1056,18 +1060,6 @@ static struct opp_device *_add_opp_dev_unlocked(const struct device *dev, > > return opp_dev; > > } > > > > -struct opp_device *_add_opp_dev(const struct device *dev, > > - struct opp_table *opp_table) > > -{ > > - struct opp_device *opp_dev; > > - > > - mutex_lock(&opp_table->lock); > > - opp_dev = _add_opp_dev_unlocked(dev, opp_table); > > - mutex_unlock(&opp_table->lock); > > - > > - return opp_dev; > > -} > > - > > static struct opp_table *_allocate_opp_table(struct device *dev, int index) > > { > > struct opp_table *opp_table; > > @@ -1121,8 +1113,6 @@ static struct opp_table *_allocate_opp_table(struct device *dev, int index) > > INIT_LIST_HEAD(&opp_table->opp_list); > > kref_init(&opp_table->kref); > > > > - /* Secure the device table modification */ > > - list_add(&opp_table->node, &opp_tables); > > return opp_table; > > > > err: > > @@ -1135,27 +1125,64 @@ void _get_opp_table_kref(struct opp_table *opp_table) > > kref_get(&opp_table->kref); > > } > > > > +/* > > + * We need to make sure that the OPP table for a device doesn't get added twice, > > + * if this routine gets called in parallel with the same device pointer. > > + * > > + * The simplest way to enforce that is to perform everything (find existing > > + * table and if not found, create a new one) under the opp_table_lock, so only > > + * one creator gets access to the same. But that expands the critical section > > + * under the lock and may end up causing circular dependencies with frameworks > > + * like debugfs, interconnect or clock framework as they may be direct or > > + * indirect users of OPP core. > > + * > > + * And for that reason we have to go for a bit tricky implementation here, which > > + * uses the opp_tables_busy flag to indicate if another creator is in the middle > > + * of adding an OPP table and others should wait for it to finish. > > + */ > > static struct opp_table *_opp_get_opp_table(struct device *dev, int index) > > { > > struct opp_table *opp_table; > > > > - /* Hold our table modification lock here */ > > +again: > > mutex_lock(&opp_table_lock); > > > > opp_table = _find_opp_table_unlocked(dev); > > if (!IS_ERR(opp_table)) > > goto unlock; > > > > + /* > > + * The opp_tables list or an OPP table's dev_list is getting updated by > > + * another user, wait for it to finish. > > + */ > > + if (unlikely(opp_tables_busy)) { > > + mutex_unlock(&opp_table_lock); > > + cpu_relax(); > > + goto again; > > + } > > + > > + opp_tables_busy = true; > > opp_table = _managed_opp(dev, index); > > + > > + /* Drop the lock to reduce the size of critical section */ > > + mutex_unlock(&opp_table_lock); > > + > > if (opp_table) { > > - if (!_add_opp_dev_unlocked(dev, opp_table)) { > > + if (!_add_opp_dev(dev, opp_table)) { > > dev_pm_opp_put_opp_table(opp_table); > > opp_table = ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM); > > } > > - goto unlock; > > + > > + mutex_lock(&opp_table_lock); > > + } else { > > + opp_table = _allocate_opp_table(dev, index); > > + > > + mutex_lock(&opp_table_lock); > > + if (!IS_ERR(opp_table)) > > + list_add(&opp_table->node, &opp_tables); > > } > > > > - opp_table = _allocate_opp_table(dev, index); > > + opp_tables_busy = false; > > > > unlock: > > mutex_unlock(&opp_table_lock); > > @@ -1181,6 +1208,10 @@ static void _opp_table_kref_release(struct kref *kref) > > struct opp_device *opp_dev, *temp; > > int i; > > > > + /* Drop the lock as soon as we can */ > > + list_del(&opp_table->node); > > + mutex_unlock(&opp_table_lock); > > + > > _of_clear_opp_table(opp_table); > > > > /* Release clk */ > > @@ -1208,10 +1239,7 @@ static void _opp_table_kref_release(struct kref *kref) > > > > mutex_destroy(&opp_table->genpd_virt_dev_lock); > > mutex_destroy(&opp_table->lock); > > - list_del(&opp_table->node); > > kfree(opp_table); > > - > > - mutex_unlock(&opp_table_lock); > > } > > > > void dev_pm_opp_put_opp_table(struct opp_table *opp_table) > > Rob, Ping. > sorry, it didn't apply cleanly (which I guess is due to some other dependencies that need to be picked back to v5.4 product kernel), and due to some other things I'm in middle of debugging I didn't have time yet to switch to v5.10-rc or look at what else needs to cherry-picked.. If you could, pushing a branch with this patch somewhere would be a bit easier to work with (ie. fetch && cherry-pick is easier to deal with than picking things from list) BR, -R