On Tue, Apr 03, 2018 at 06:02:43PM +0100, John Garry wrote: > On 03/04/2018 17:37, Thierry Reding wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 03, 2018 at 05:01:37PM +0100, John Garry wrote: > > > > > > +int logic_pio_register_range(struct logic_pio_hwaddr *new_range) > > > > > > +{ > > > > > > + struct logic_pio_hwaddr *range; > > > > > > + resource_size_t start = new_range->hw_start; > > > > > > + resource_size_t end = new_range->hw_start + new_range->size; > > > > > > + resource_size_t mmio_sz = 0; > > > > > > + resource_size_t iio_sz = MMIO_UPPER_LIMIT; > > > > > > + int ret = 0; > > > > > > + > > > > > > + if (!new_range || !new_range->fwnode || !new_range->size) > > > > > > + return -EINVAL; > > > > > > + > > > > > > + mutex_lock(&io_range_mutex); > > > > > > + list_for_each_entry_rcu(range, &io_range_list, list) { > > > > > > + if (range->fwnode == new_range->fwnode) { > > > > > > + /* range already there */ > > > > > > + ret = -EFAULT; > > > > > > + goto end_register; > > > > > > + } > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Thierry, > > > > > > > > This is the -EFAULT that propagates to pci-tegra.c's ->probe() and fails > > > > > to bind the driver. > > > > > > > > > > I'm not exactly sure what's causing the duplicate here because it's > > > > > rather difficult to get at something useful from just the ->fwnode, but > > > > > I'm fairly sure that the reason this breaks is because the Tegra driver > > > > > will defer probe due to some regulators that aren't available on the > > > > > first try. Given the above code and the rest of this file, I can't see a > > > > > way to "fix" the driver and remove the I/O range on failure. > > > > > > > > > > This is doubly bad because this doesn't only leak the ranges on probe > > > > > deferral, but also on driver unload, and we just added support for > > > > > building the Tegra driver as a loadable module, so these are actually > > > > > cases that can happen in regular uses of the driver. > > > > > > > > > > I have no idea on how to fix this. Anyone know of a quick fix to restore > > > > > PCI for Tegra other than reverting all of these changes? > > > > > > > > > > I suppose an API could be added to unregister the range, but the calling > > > > > sequence is rather obfuscated, so removing the range will look totally > > > > > asymmetric, I'm afraid. > > > > > > > > > > Here's the call stack: > > > > > > > > > > tegra_pcie_probe() > > > > > tegra_pcie_parse_dt() > > > > > of_pci_range_to_resource() > > > > > pci_register_io_range() > > > > > logic_pio_register_range() > > > > > > > > > > So the range here is registered as part of a resource parsing function, > > > > > which is supposed to not have any side-effects. There's no equivalent of > > > > > that parsing routine (i.e. no "unparse" function that would undo the > > > > > effects of parsing). > > > > > > > > > > Perhaps a cleaner way would be to decouple the parsing from the actual > > > > > request step that has the side-effect. > > > > > > This could be added if we agreed that it would be useful. > > > > I guess in most cases these ranges will be static at least during one > > boot. But it still feels like this should be removed when the driver > > goes away. While this may not depend on data by the driver, and hence > > won't cause a crash or anything, it just seems wrong to leave it > > around when the driver no longer isn't. > > That sounds reasonable, considering we do unmap the iospace when we release > - so it looks like currently we're leaving some IO range reserved which does > not have a mapping. > > However this change seems non-trivial, considering we're now even coupling > the PIO range registration into DT parsing. > > > > > > > > Going back in history a little, it looks like even before this commit > > > > > the I/O range registration was triggered by the parsing code and even > > > > > the range leak was there, except that it caused pci_register_io_range() > > > > > to return 0 rather than -EFAULT. Perhaps the quickest fix for this would > > > > > be to do the same in the new code and restore drivers that accidentally > > > > > depend on this behaviour. > > > > > > > > I can confirm that the following fixes the issue for me, though I don't > > > > think it's a very clean fix given that the range will remain requested > > > > forever, even if the driver is gone. But since that's already been the > > > > case for quite a while, probably something that can be fixed separately. > > > > > > > > > > Right, there was no way to deregister the range previously. From looking at > > > the history here I see no reason to not support it. > > > > > > As for this patch, as you said, the only difference is that we fault on > > > trying to register the same range again. So this solution seems reasonable. > > > > Okay, I can turn this into a proper patch to fix this up. I suspect that > > other drivers may be subject to the same regression. For the longer term > > I think it'd be better to properly undo the registration on failure and > > removal, but I suspect that it'd be quite a bit of work and not suitable > > for v4.17 anymore. > > Thanks, I had started to put the patch together but if you're happy to > continue then that's fine. Please let me know. Since you seem to agree this is the right short-term fix and I would squash it into the original commit anyway, I went ahead and did that so we could get this into linux-next as soon as possible. Here's the diff from my previous "next" branch with respect to this series: diff --git a/lib/logic_pio.c b/lib/logic_pio.c index 29cedeadb397..4664b87e1c5f 100644 --- a/lib/logic_pio.c +++ b/lib/logic_pio.c @@ -46,7 +46,6 @@ int logic_pio_register_range(struct logic_pio_hwaddr *new_range) list_for_each_entry_rcu(range, &io_range_list, list) { if (range->fwnode == new_range->fwnode) { /* range already there */ - ret = -EFAULT; goto end_register; } if (range->flags == LOGIC_PIO_CPU_MMIO && -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html