On Mon, 2023-01-02 at 16:29 -0800, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 12/27/22 22:01, peter.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > When wlun resume SSU(Active) timeout, scsi try
> > eh_host_reset_handler.
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^
> Please use the same spelling in the patch subject (Acitve -> Active).
>
> timeout -> times out
> scsi try -> the SCSI core invokes
>
> > But ufshcd_eh_host_reset_handler hang at wait flush_work(&hba-
> > >eh_work).
>
> hang at -> hangs in
>
> > And ufshcd_err_handler hang at wait rpm resume.
>
> hang at wait rpm resume -> hangs in rpm_resume().
>
> > <ffffffdd78e02b34> schedule+0x110/0x204
> > <ffffffdd78e0be60> schedule_timeout+0x98/0x138
> > <ffffffdd78e040e8> wait_for_common_io+0x130/0x2d0
> > <ffffffdd77d6a000> blk_execute_rq+0x10c/0x16c
> > <ffffffdd78126d90> __scsi_execute+0xfc/0x278
> > <ffffffdd7813891c> ufshcd_set_dev_pwr_mode+0x1c8/0x40c
> > <ffffffdd78137d1c> __ufshcd_wl_resume+0xf0/0x5cc
> > <ffffffdd78137ae0> ufshcd_wl_runtime_resume+0x40/0x18c
> > <ffffffdd78136108> scsi_runtime_resume+0x88/0x104
> > <ffffffdd7809a4f8> __rpm_callback+0x1a0/0xaec
> > <ffffffdd7809b624> rpm_resume+0x7e0/0xcd0
> > <ffffffdd7809a788> __rpm_callback+0x430/0xaec
> > <ffffffdd7809b644> rpm_resume+0x800/0xcd0
> > <ffffffdd780a0778> pm_runtime_work+0x148/0x198
> >
> > <ffffffdd78e02b34> schedule+0x110/0x204
> > <ffffffdd78e0be10> schedule_timeout+0x48/0x138
> > <ffffffdd78e03d9c> wait_for_common+0x144/0x2dc
> > <ffffffdd7758bba4> __flush_work+0x3d0/0x508
> > <ffffffdd7815572c> ufshcd_eh_host_reset_handler+0x134/0x3a8
> > <ffffffdd781216f4> scsi_try_host_reset+0x54/0x204
> > <ffffffdd78120594> scsi_eh_ready_devs+0xb30/0xd48
> > <ffffffdd7812373c> scsi_error_handler+0x260/0x874
> >
> > <ffffffdd78e02b34> schedule+0x110/0x204
> > <ffffffdd7809af64> rpm_resume+0x120/0xcd0
> > <ffffffdd7809fde8> __pm_runtime_resume+0xa0/0x17c
> > <ffffffdd7815193c> ufshcd_err_handling_prepare+0x40/0x430
> > <ffffffdd7814cce8> ufshcd_err_handler+0x1c4/0xd4c
>
> On top of which kernel version has this patch been developed?
> I think this deadlock has already been fixed by commit 7029e2151a7c
> ("scsi: ufs: Fix a deadlock between PM and the SCSI error handler").
> Please check whether that commit by itself (without this patch) is
> sufficient to fix the reported deadlock.
>
Hi Bart,
7029e2151a7c is not fix this dead lock, we still found this issue
happen in kernel-6.1
I will update this patch and correct comment.
Please have a look again.
Thanks.
Peter
> > ---
> > drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+)
>
> The changelog is missing. Please include a changelog when posting v2
> or
> a later version of a patch.
>
> > diff --git a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c
> > index e18c9f4463ec..0dfb9a35bf66 100644
> > --- a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c
> > +++ b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c
> > @@ -7366,6 +7366,23 @@ static int
> > ufshcd_eh_host_reset_handler(struct scsi_cmnd *cmd)
> >
> > hba = shost_priv(cmd->device->host);
> >
> > + /*
> > + * If pm op resume fail and wait err recovery, do link recovery
> > only.
> > + * Because schedule eh work will get dead lock in
> > ufshcd_rpm_get_sync
> > + * and wait wlun resume, but wlun resume error wait eh work
> > finish.
> > + */
>
> The above comment has grammar issues and some parts are
> incomprehensible. What does e.g. "wait err recovery" mean? Please
> improve this source code comment.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bart.
