From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
To: Luca Coelho <luca@coelho.fi>,
Srinath Mannam <srinath.mannam@broadcom.com>
Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>,
"Grumbach, Emmanuel" <emmanuel.grumbach@intel.com>,
linuxwifi <linuxwifi@intel.com>,
"linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: iwlwifi firmware load broken in current -git
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2017 13:46:45 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a9913d13-c14d-c261-e4ed-739bccc7755d@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1505504195.5400.295.camel@coelho.fi>
On 09/15/2017 01:36 PM, Luca Coelho wrote:
> On Fri, 2017-09-15 at 13:32 -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 09/14/2017 02:36 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>> On 09/14/2017 02:04 PM, Srinath Mannam wrote:
>>>> Hi Jens Axboe,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 11:14 PM, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> wrote:
>>>>> On 09/14/2017 11:35 AM, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>>>>> On 09/14/2017 11:28 AM, Srinath Mannam wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi Bjorn,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 10:52 PM, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 09/14/2017 11:11 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>>>>>>>>> [+cc linux-pci]
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 12:00 PM, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 09/12/2017 02:04 PM, Johannes Berg wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 2017-09-12 at 13:43 -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> CC'ing the guilty part and Bjorn. I'm assuming it's the
>>>>>>>>>>>> pci_is_enabled() check, since the rest of the patch shouldn't have
>>>>>>>>>>>> functional changes.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> and pci_enable_bridge() already checks if it's already enabled, but
>>>>>>>>>>> still enables mastering in that case if it isn't:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> static void pci_enable_bridge(struct pci_dev *dev)
>>>>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>>>>> if (pci_is_enabled(dev)) {
>>>>>>>>>>> if (!dev->is_busmaster)
>>>>>>>>>>> pci_set_master(dev);
>>>>>>>>>>> return;
>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> so I guess due to the new check we end up with mastering disabled, and
>>>>>>>>>>> thus the firmware can't load since that's a DMA thing?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Bjorn/Srinath, any input here? This is a regression that prevents wifi
>>>>>>>>>> from working on a pretty standard laptop. It'd suck to have this be in
>>>>>>>>>> -rc1. Seems like the trivial fix would be:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/pci.c b/drivers/pci/pci.c
>>>>>>>>>> index b0002daa50f3..ffbe11dbdd61 100644
>>>>>>>>>> --- a/drivers/pci/pci.c
>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/pci/pci.c
>>>>>>>>>> @@ -1394,7 +1394,7 @@ static int pci_enable_device_flags(struct pci_dev *dev, unsigned long flags)
>>>>>>>>>> return 0; /* already enabled */
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> bridge = pci_upstream_bridge(dev);
>>>>>>>>>> - if (bridge && !pci_is_enabled(bridge))
>>>>>>>>>> + if (bridge)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> With this change and keeping "mutex_lock(&pci_bridge_mutex);" in
>>>>>>> pci_enable_bridge functoin will causes a nexted lock.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Took a look, and looks like you are right. That code looks like a mess,
>>>>>> fwiw.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd strongly suggest that the bad commit is reverted until a proper
>>>>>> solution is found, since the simple one-liner could potentially
>>>>>> introduce a deadlock with your patch applied.
>>>>>
>>>>> BTW, your patch looks pretty bad too, introducing a random mutex
>>>>> deep on code that can be recursive. Why isn't this check in
>>>>> pci_enable_device_flags() enough to prevent double-enable of
>>>>> an upstream bridge?
>>>>>
>>>>> if (atomic_inc_return(&dev->enable_cnt) > 1)
>>>>> return 0; /* already enabled */
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This check only to verify device enable not for the bus master check.
>>>> But device enable function calls the bridge enable if it has the bridge.
>>>> Bridge enable function enables both device and bus master.
>>>>
>>>> Here the issue might be because, bridge of endpoint has already set
>>>> device enable without set bus master in some other context. which is
>>>> wrong.
>>>> because all bridges should enable with bridge_enable function only.
>>>> So we see the problem In this context, because "if (bridge &&
>>>> !pci_is_enabled(bridge))" check stops bridge enable which intern stops
>>>> bus master.
>>>> pci_enable_bridge function always makes sure that both device and bus
>>>> master are enabled in any case. If pci_enable_bridge function is not
>>>> called means, that bridge is already has device enable flag set. which
>>>> is not from pci_enable_bridge function.
>>>
>>> In any case, your patch introduces a regression on systems. Please get
>>> it reverted now, and then you can come up with a new approach to fix the
>>> double enable of the upstream bridge.
>>
>> Who's sending in the revert? I can certainly do it if no one else does,
>> but it needs to be done.
>>
>> I'm not seeing any patches coming out of Srinath to fix up the
>> situation, so we should revert the broken patch until a better solution
>> exists.
>
> Bjorn already sent it:
>
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/9/15/46
Huh ok, I would have thought the various folks in this discussion would
have been CC'ed on that. But good to know, that takes care of my
concern.
--
Jens Axboe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-09-15 19:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-09-12 15:48 iwlwifi firmware load broken in current -git Jens Axboe
2017-09-12 16:11 ` Coelho, Luciano
2017-09-12 16:35 ` Jens Axboe
2017-09-12 16:36 ` Luca Coelho
2017-09-12 16:59 ` Jens Axboe
2017-09-12 19:43 ` Jens Axboe
2017-09-12 19:51 ` Luca Coelho
2017-09-12 20:04 ` Johannes Berg
2017-09-14 17:00 ` Jens Axboe
2017-09-14 17:11 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2017-09-14 17:22 ` Jens Axboe
2017-09-14 17:28 ` Srinath Mannam
2017-09-14 17:35 ` Jens Axboe
2017-09-14 17:44 ` Srinath Mannam
2017-09-14 17:45 ` Jens Axboe
2017-09-14 17:50 ` Johannes Berg
2017-09-14 17:44 ` Jens Axboe
2017-09-14 20:04 ` Srinath Mannam
2017-09-14 20:36 ` Jens Axboe
2017-09-15 19:32 ` Jens Axboe
2017-09-15 19:36 ` Luca Coelho
2017-09-15 19:46 ` Jens Axboe [this message]
2017-09-15 19:38 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-09-15 19:43 ` Luca Coelho
2017-09-15 19:51 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-09-15 19:57 ` Jens Axboe
2017-09-15 19:48 ` Jens Axboe
2017-09-15 19:51 ` Luca Coelho
2017-09-15 19:55 ` Jens Axboe
2017-09-16 3:03 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2017-09-16 18:53 ` Jens Axboe
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=a9913d13-c14d-c261-e4ed-739bccc7755d@kernel.dk \
--to=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=emmanuel.grumbach@intel.com \
--cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxwifi@intel.com \
--cc=luca@coelho.fi \
--cc=srinath.mannam@broadcom.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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).