RE: [PATCH] mmc: fix a deadlock between system suspend and MMC block IO

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Chris,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: linux-mmc-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:linux-mmc-
> owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Chris Ball
> Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2012 8:07 PM
> To: Guennadi Liakhovetski
> Cc: linux-mmc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmc: fix a deadlock between system suspend and MMC
> block IO
> 
> Hi,
> 
> On Wed, Jan 04 2012, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> > Performing MMC block IO with simultaneous STR can lead to a deadlock:
> the
> > mmc_pm_notify() function claims the host and then calls bus .remove()
> > method, which lands in mmc_blk_remove(), which calls
> mmc_blk_remove_req()
> > then it goes to -> mmc_cleanup_queue() -> kthread_stop(), which waits
> for
> > the mmc-block thread to stop. If the mmc-block thread at that time is
> > processing block requests, it will also try to claim the host in
> > mmc_blk_issue_rq() and block there. This patch fixes the problem by
> > calling .remove() before claiming the host.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@xxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  drivers/mmc/core/core.c |    4 ++--
> >  1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/core.c b/drivers/mmc/core/core.c
> > index a2aa860..a68f085 100644
> > --- a/drivers/mmc/core/core.c
> > +++ b/drivers/mmc/core/core.c
> > @@ -2476,11 +2476,11 @@ int mmc_pm_notify(struct notifier_block
> *notify_block,
> >  		if (!host->bus_ops || host->bus_ops->suspend)
> >  			break;
> >
> > -		mmc_claim_host(host);
> > -
> > +		/* On 2 occasions above bus_ops->remove() is called
> unlocked */
> >  		if (host->bus_ops->remove)
> >  			host->bus_ops->remove(host);
> >
> > +		mmc_claim_host(host);
> >  		mmc_detach_bus(host);
> >  		mmc_power_off(host);
> >  		mmc_release_host(host);
> 
> Thanks.  The commit message explanation is very good, but the comment
> is
> a bit cryptic.  Shall we make it longer?  I think even just:
> 
> /* Calling bus_ops->remove() with a claimed host can deadlock */
> 
> would be better.

This patch will actually fix a long standing issue for most of us. But if I remember correctly, Andrei had some comments on the same patch some time back. Would it be good to include him for comments?

Thanks,
Arindam

> 
> - Chris.
> --
> Chris Ball   <cjb@xxxxxxxxxx>   <http://printf.net/>
> One Laptop Per Child
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Media]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux