From: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
Linux PM list <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
"open list:TI ETHERNET SWITCH DRIVER (CPSW)"
<linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>,
Biju Das <biju.das@bp.renesas.com>,
Linux-Renesas <linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PM-runtime: fix deadlock with ktime
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2019 10:41:16 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAKfTPtD+Yd7fBw=PhnedYmkGGW-JhNiZ739B-8YD7pFJEe9wig@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJZ5v0jLJ8Tu7Gpt-4bhW59Q3=PX4wyb2rFBWuPKMFHcFXBxAA@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 at 10:39, Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 10:14 AM Vincent Guittot
> <vincent.guittot@linaro.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Geert,
> >
> > On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 at 09:21, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Vincent,
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 9:16 AM Vincent Guittot
> > > <vincent.guittot@linaro.org> wrote:
> > > > A deadlock has been seen when swicthing clocksources which use PM runtime.
> > > > The call path is:
> > > > change_clocksource
> > > > ...
> > > > write_seqcount_begin
> > > > ...
> > > > timekeeping_update
> > > > ...
> > > > sh_cmt_clocksource_enable
> > > > ...
> > > > rpm_resume
> > > > pm_runtime_mark_last_busy
> > > > ktime_get
> > > > do
> > > > read_seqcount_begin
> > > > while read_seqcount_retry
> > > > ....
> > > > write_seqcount_end
> > > >
> > > > Although we should be safe because we haven't yet changed the clocksource
> > > > at that time, we can't because of seqcount protection.
> > > >
> > > > Use ktime_get_mono_fast_ns instead which is lock safe for such case
> > > >
> > > > Fixes: 8234f6734c5d ("PM-runtime: Switch autosuspend over to using hrtimers")
> > > > Reported-by: Biju Das <biju.das@bp.renesas.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
> > >
> > > Thanks for your patch!
> > >
> > > /**
> > > * ktime_get_mono_fast_ns - Fast NMI safe access to clock monotonic
> > > *
> > > * This timestamp is not guaranteed to be monotonic across an update.
> > > * The timestamp is calculated by:
> > > *
> > > * now = base_mono + clock_delta * slope
> > > *
> > > * So if the update lowers the slope, readers who are forced to the
> > > * not yet updated second array are still using the old steeper slope.
> > > *
> > > * tmono
> > > * ^
> > > * | o n
> > > * | o n
> > > * | u
> > > * | o
> > > * |o
> > > * |12345678---> reader order
> > > *
> > > * o = old slope
> > > * u = update
> > > * n = new slope
> > > *
> > > * So reader 6 will observe time going backwards versus reader 5.
> > > *
> > > * While other CPUs are likely to be able observe that, the only way
> > > * for a CPU local observation is when an NMI hits in the middle of
> > > * the update. Timestamps taken from that NMI context might be ahead
> > > * of the following timestamps. Callers need to be aware of that and
> > > * deal with it.
> > > */
> > >
> > > As this function is not guaranteed to be monotonic, have you checked how
> > > the Runtime PM code behaves if time goes backwards? Does it just make
> > > a suboptimal decision or does it crash?
> >
> > As a worst case this will generate a suboptimal decision around the update
>
> So that should be explained in the changelog of the patch. In detail,
> if poss, please.
Ok, I'm going to update the commit message
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-01-30 9:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-01-30 8:16 [PATCH] PM-runtime: fix deadlock with ktime Vincent Guittot
2019-01-30 8:21 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-01-30 9:14 ` Vincent Guittot
2019-01-30 9:39 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-01-30 9:41 ` Vincent Guittot [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='CAKfTPtD+Yd7fBw=PhnedYmkGGW-JhNiZ739B-8YD7pFJEe9wig@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=biju.das@bp.renesas.com \
--cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=ulf.hansson@linaro.org \
/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).