Hi Rafael,
On 2019-02-08 11:22, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 7:50 AM Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On 07-02-19, 13:22, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
>>> Dear All,
>>>
>>> Recent commit 9ac6cb5fbb17 ("i2c: add suspended flag and accessors for
>>> i2c adapters") added a visible warning for an attempt to do i2c transfer
>>> over a suspended i2c bus. This revealed a long standing issue in the
>>> cpufreq-dt driver, which gives a following warning during system
>>> suspend/resume cycle:
>>>
>>> --->8---
>>> Enabling non-boot CPUs ...
>>> CPU1 is up
>>> CPU2 is up
>>> CPU3 is up
>>> ------------[ cut here ]------------
>>> WARNING: CPU: 4 PID: 29 at drivers/i2c/i2c-core-base.c:1869 __i2c_transfer+0x6f8/0xa50
>>> Modules linked in:
>>> CPU: 4 PID: 29 Comm: cpuhp/4 Tainted: G W 5.0.0-rc4-next-20190131-00024-g54b06b29cc65 #5324
>>> Hardware name: SAMSUNG EXYNOS (Flattened Device Tree)
>>> [<c01110e8>] (unwind_backtrace) from [<c010d11c>] (show_stack+0x10/0x14)
>>> [<c010d11c>] (show_stack) from [<c09a2584>] (dump_stack+0x90/0xc8)
>>> [<c09a2584>] (dump_stack) from [<c0120bd0>] (__warn+0xf8/0x124)
>>> [<c0120bd0>] (__warn) from [<c0120c3c>] (warn_slowpath_null+0x40/0x48)
>>> [<c0120c3c>] (warn_slowpath_null) from [<c065cda0>] (__i2c_transfer+0x6f8/0xa50)
>>> [<c065cda0>] (__i2c_transfer) from [<c065d168>] (i2c_transfer+0x70/0xe4)
>>> [<c065d168>] (i2c_transfer) from [<c053ce4c>] (regmap_i2c_read+0x48/0x64)
>>> [<c053ce4c>] (regmap_i2c_read) from [<c0536f1c>] (_regmap_raw_read+0xf8/0x450)
>>> [<c0536f1c>] (_regmap_raw_read) from [<c053772c>] (_regmap_bus_read+0x38/0x68)
>>> [<c053772c>] (_regmap_bus_read) from [<c05365a0>] (_regmap_read+0x60/0x250)
>>> [<c05365a0>] (_regmap_read) from [<c05367cc>] (regmap_read+0x3c/0x5c)
>>> [<c05367cc>] (regmap_read) from [<c047cfc0>] (regulator_is_enabled_regmap+0x20/0x90)
>>> [<c047cfc0>] (regulator_is_enabled_regmap) from [<c0477660>] (_regulator_is_enabled+0x34/0x40)
>>> [<c0477660>] (_regulator_is_enabled) from [<c0478674>] (create_regulator+0x1a4/0x25c)
>>> [<c0478674>] (create_regulator) from [<c047c818>] (_regulator_get+0xe4/0x278)
>>> [<c047c818>] (_regulator_get) from [<c068f1dc>] (dev_pm_opp_set_regulators+0xa0/0x1c0)
>>> [<c068f1dc>] (dev_pm_opp_set_regulators) from [<c0698cc8>] (cpufreq_init+0x98/0x2d0)
>>> [<c0698cc8>] (cpufreq_init) from [<c06959e4>] (cpufreq_online+0xc8/0x71c)
>>> [<c06959e4>] (cpufreq_online) from [<c06960fc>] (cpuhp_cpufreq_online+0x8/0x10)
>>> [<c06960fc>] (cpuhp_cpufreq_online) from [<c01213d4>] (cpuhp_invoke_callback+0xf4/0xebc)
>>> [<c01213d4>] (cpuhp_invoke_callback) from [<c0122e4c>] (cpuhp_thread_fun+0x1d8/0x320)
>>> [<c0122e4c>] (cpuhp_thread_fun) from [<c0149858>] (smpboot_thread_fn+0x194/0x340)
>>> [<c0149858>] (smpboot_thread_fn) from [<c014573c>] (kthread+0x124/0x160)
>>> [<c014573c>] (kthread) from [<c01010b4>] (ret_from_fork+0x14/0x20)
>>> Exception stack(0xe897dfb0 to 0xe897dff8)
>>> dfa0: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000
>>> dfc0: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000
>>> dfe0: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000013 00000000
>>> irq event stamp: 3865
>>> hardirqs last enabled at (3873): [<c0186dec>] vprintk_emit+0x228/0x2a4
>>> hardirqs last disabled at (3880): [<c0186cf0>] vprintk_emit+0x12c/0x2a4
>>> softirqs last enabled at (3052): [<c0102564>] __do_softirq+0x3a4/0x66c
>>> softirqs last disabled at (3043): [<c0128464>] irq_exit+0x140/0x168
>>> ---[ end trace db48b455d924fec2 ]---
>>> CPU4 is up
>>> CPU5 is up
>>> CPU6 is up
>>> CPU7 is up
>>> --->8---
>>>
>>> This is a scenario that triggers the above issue:
>>>
>>> 1. system disables non-boot cpu's at the end of system suspend procedure,
>>> 2. this in turn deinitializes cpufreq drivers for the disabled cpus,
>>> 3. early in the system resume procedure all cpus are got back to online
>>> state,
>>> 4. this in turn causes cpufreq to be initialized for the newly onlined
>>> cpus,
>>> 5. cpufreq-dt acquires all its resources (clocks, regulators) during
>>> ->init() callback,
>>> 6. getting regulator require to check its state, what in turn requires
>>> i2c transfer,
>>> 7. during system early resume stage this is not really possible.
>>>
>>> The issue is caused by cpufreq-dt driver not keeping its resources for
>>> the whole driver lifetime and relying that they can be always acquired
>>> at any system context. This problem has been observed on Samsung
>>> Exynos based Odroid XU3/XU4 boards, but it happens on all boards, which
>>> have separate regulators for different CPU clusters.
>> Why don't you get similar problem during suspend? I think you can get
>> it when the CPUs are offlined as I2C would have gone by then. The
>> cpufreq or OPP core can try and run some regulator or genpd or clk
>> calls to disable resources, etc. Even if doesn't happen, it certainly
>> can.
>>
>> Also at resume the cpufreq core may try to change the frequency right
>> from ->init() on certain cases, though not everytime and so the
>> problem can come despite of this series.
>>
>> We guarantee that the resources are available during probe but not
>> during resume, that's where the problem is.
>>
>> @Rafael any suggestions on how to fix this ?
> There are cpufreq driver suspend and resume callbacks, maybe use them?
>
> The driver could do the I2C transactions in its suspend/resume
> callbacks and do nothing in online/offline if those are part of
> system-wide suspend/resume.
This is exactly what I suggested, when I wrote to handle it in cpufreq
suspend/resume.
Best regards
--
Marek Szyprowski, PhD
Samsung R&D Institute Poland
