linux-pci.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
Cc: Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com>,
	Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
	linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>,
	Alexandru Gagniuc <mr.nuke.me@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI/PME: Fix race on PME polling
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2019 12:45:31 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190618094531.GJ2640@lahna.fi.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2521908.csJO6TsRBn@kreacher>

On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 12:41:01AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Monday, June 17, 2019 4:35:10 PM CEST Mika Westerberg wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 12:37:06PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Sunday, June 9, 2019 1:29:33 PM CEST Lukas Wunner wrote:
> > > > Since commit df17e62e5bff ("PCI: Add support for polling PME state on
> > > > suspended legacy PCI devices"), the work item pci_pme_list_scan() polls
> > > > the PME status flag of devices and wakes them up if the bit is set.
> > > > 
> > > > The function performs a check whether a device's upstream bridge is in
> > > > D0 for otherwise the device is inaccessible, rendering PME polling
> > > > impossible.  However the check is racy because it is performed before
> > > > polling the device.  If the upstream bridge runtime suspends to D3hot
> > > > after pci_pme_list_scan() checks its power state and before it invokes
> > > > pci_pme_wakeup(), the latter will read the PMCSR as "all ones" and
> > > > mistake it for a set PME status flag.  I am seeing this race play out as
> > > > a Thunderbolt controller going to D3cold and occasionally immediately
> > > > going to D0 again because PM polling was performed at just the wrong
> > > > time.
> > > > 
> > > > Avoid by checking for an "all ones" PMCSR in pci_check_pme_status().
> > > > 
> > > > Fixes: 58ff463396ad ("PCI PM: Add function for checking PME status of devices")
> > > > Tested-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de>
> > > > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # v2.6.34+
> > > > Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  drivers/pci/pci.c | 2 ++
> > > >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/pci.c b/drivers/pci/pci.c
> > > > index 8abc843b1615..eed5db9f152f 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/pci/pci.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/pci/pci.c
> > > > @@ -1989,6 +1989,8 @@ bool pci_check_pme_status(struct pci_dev *dev)
> > > >  	pci_read_config_word(dev, pmcsr_pos, &pmcsr);
> > > >  	if (!(pmcsr & PCI_PM_CTRL_PME_STATUS))
> > > >  		return false;
> > > > +	if (pmcsr == 0xffff)
> > > > +		return false;
> > > >  
> > > >  	/* Clear PME status. */
> > > >  	pmcsr |= PCI_PM_CTRL_PME_STATUS;
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Added to my 5.3 queue, thanks!
> > 
> > Today when doing some PM testing I noticed that this patch actually
> > reveals an issue in our native PME handling. Problem is in
> > pcie_pme_handle_request() where we first convert req_id to struct
> > pci_dev and then call pci_check_pme_status() for it. Now, when a device
> > triggers wake the link is first brought up and then the PME is sent to
> > root complex with req_id matching the originating device. However, if
> > there are PCIe ports in the middle they may still be in D3 which means
> > that pci_check_pme_status() returns 0xffff for the device below so there
> > are lots of
> > 
> > 	Spurious native interrupt"
> > 
> > messages in the dmesg but the actual PME is never handled.
> > 
> > It has been working because pci_check_pme_status() returned true in case
> > of 0xffff as well and we went and runtime resumed to originating device.
> 
> In this case 0xffff is as good as PME Status set, that is the device needs to be
> resumed.
> 
> This is a regression in the $subject patch, not a bug in the PME code.

OK, thanks for explanation.

> > I think the correct way to handle this is actually drop the call to
> > pci_check_pme_status() in pcie_pme_handle_request() because the whole
> > idea of req_id in PME message is to allow the root complex and SW to
> > identify the device without need to poll for the PME status bit.
> 
> Not really, because if there is a PCIe-to-PCI bridge below the port, it is
> expected to use the req_id of the bridge for all of the devices below it.

Right, I forgot about that so indeed we need to check for the PME status
in that case to find out the correct device.

      reply	other threads:[~2019-06-18  9:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-06-09 11:29 [PATCH] PCI/PME: Fix race on PME polling Lukas Wunner
2019-06-17 10:37 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-06-17 14:35   ` Mika Westerberg
2019-06-17 14:53     ` Lukas Wunner
2019-06-17 22:43       ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-06-17 22:41     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-06-18  9:45       ` Mika Westerberg [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20190618094531.GJ2640@lahna.fi.intel.com \
    --to=mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=keith.busch@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lukas@wunner.de \
    --cc=mr.nuke.me@gmail.com \
    --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).