> > > @@ -9162,7 +9159,6 @@ static int ufshcd_setup_clocks(struct ufs_hba
> *hba, bool on)
> > > int ret = 0;
> > > struct ufs_clk_info *clki;
> > > struct list_head *head = &hba->clk_list_head;
> > > - unsigned long flags;
> > > ktime_t start = ktime_get();
> > > bool clk_state_changed = false;
> > >
> > > @@ -9213,11 +9209,10 @@ static int ufshcd_setup_clocks(struct ufs_hba
> *hba, bool on)
> > > clk_disable_unprepare(clki->clk);
> > > }
> > > } else if (!ret && on) {
> > > - spin_lock_irqsave(hba->host->host_lock, flags);
> > > - hba->clk_gating.state = CLKS_ON;
> > > + scoped_guard(spinlock_irqsave, &hba->clk_gating.lock)
> >
> > This triggers the following lockdep warning on Qualcomm boards as
> > reported by Dmitry offline:
> >
> > [ 4.388838] INFO: trying to register non-static key.
> > [ 4.395673] The code is fine but needs lockdep annotation, or maybe
> > [ 4.402118] you didn't initialize this object before use?
> > [ 4.407673] turning off the locking correctness validator.
> > [ 4.413334] CPU: 5 UID: 0 PID: 58 Comm: kworker/u32:1 Not tainted 6.12-
> rc1 #185
> > [ 4.413343] Hardware name: Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. Robotics RB5
> (DT)
> > [ 4.413362] Call trace:
> > [ 4.413364] show_stack+0x18/0x24 (C)
> > [ 4.413374] dump_stack_lvl+0x90/0xd0
> > [ 4.413384] dump_stack+0x18/0x24
> > [ 4.413392] register_lock_class+0x498/0x4a8
> > [ 4.413400] __lock_acquire+0xb4/0x1b90
> > [ 4.413406] lock_acquire+0x114/0x310
> > [ 4.413413] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x60/0x88
> > [ 4.413423] ufshcd_setup_clocks+0x2c0/0x490
> > [ 4.413433] ufshcd_init+0x198/0x10ec
> > [ 4.413437] ufshcd_pltfrm_init+0x600/0x7c0
> > [ 4.413444] ufs_qcom_probe+0x20/0x58
> > [ 4.413449] platform_probe+0x68/0xd8
> > [ 4.413459] really_probe+0xbc/0x268
> > [ 4.413466] __driver_probe_device+0x78/0x12c
> > [ 4.413473] driver_probe_device+0x40/0x11c
> > [ 4.413481] __device_attach_driver+0xb8/0xf8
> > [ 4.413489] bus_for_each_drv+0x84/0xe4
> > [ 4.413495] __device_attach+0xfc/0x18c
> > [ 4.413502] device_initial_probe+0x14/0x20
> > [ 4.413510] bus_probe_device+0xb0/0xb4
> > [ 4.413517] deferred_probe_work_func+0x8c/0xc8
> > [ 4.413524] process_scheduled_works+0x250/0x658
> > [ 4.413534] worker_thread+0x15c/0x2c8
> > [ 4.413542] kthread+0x134/0x200
> > [ 4.413550] ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20
> >
> > As lockdep found, clk_gating.lock is uninitialized when
> > ufshcd_setup_clocks() is called for the first time. I looked into
> > fixing it for a moment, but the overall locking for 'clk_gating.state'
> > looks fragile i.e., there are instances where the code is not locked
> > at all. So I'm just reporting to you here hoping that you'd have some idea
> to fix it.
Thanks for reporting this.
How about just:
+++ b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c
@@ -9166,7 +9166,7 @@ static int ufshcd_setup_clocks(struct ufs_hba *hba, bool on)
if (!IS_ERR_OR_NULL(clki->clk) && clki->enabled)
clk_disable_unprepare(clki->clk);
}
- } else if (!ret && on) {
+ } else if (!ret && on && hba->clk_gating.is_initialized) {
scoped_guard(spinlock_irqsave, &hba->clk_gating.lock)
hba->clk_gating.state = CLKS_ON;
trace_ufshcd_clk_gating(dev_name(hba->dev),
What do you think?
Thanks,
Avri
> >
> > While submitting the fix, please add the following reported by tag:
> >
> > Reported-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > - Mani
> >
> > --
> > மணிவண்ணன் சதாசிவம்
>
> --
> மணிவண்ணன் சதாசிவம்
